list-projects

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's behavioral burden is lower. It adds no additional behavioral details (e.g., pagination, rate limits, required permissions) beyond the purpose. Acceptable given annotations but not enriched.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource, immediately followed by purpose. No wasted words, perfectly concise for a simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only list tool with no parameters and no output schema required, the description covers the essential: what it lists and why an agent would use it. Lacks details on output format but sufficient for context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist in the input schema, so schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add param info; the baseline of 4 is appropriate as there is no missing meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the tool lists Bult.ai hosting projects, with the specific verb 'List' and resource 'projects'. The purpose context (deploy, inspect, manage) adds clarity and distinguishes from sibling tools that list other resources like services or builds.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions the use case (choose where to deploy, etc.) but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over alternatives like list-services or list-builds. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.