getTokenSplashProjectList

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by saying 'Returns a paginated list.' It adds behavioral context beyond the annotations by defining status values (0=upcoming, 1=ongoing, 2=ended) and outlining pagination behavior via cursor+limit. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The purpose and agent hint are front-loaded and generally tight. The middle sentence about AI agent usage is somewhat redundant with the opening and hint, but the overall length is reasonable for a 5-parameter 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?

With no output schema, the description does most of the work: it covers required status, optional filters, and pagination mechanics. It could be more complete by explaining what an item in the paginated list contains or how cursor values are obtained, but an agent can correctly invoke the tool from this text.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well: status is explained with value meanings, projectId is mapped to looking up a specific activity, and cursor+limit are described as pagination controls. activityCoin is only named, not detailed, which prevents a higher score.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns a paginated list of Token Splash activities filtered by status.' This clearly distinguishes it from the many sibling tools by naming the Token Splash domain and list behavior, and it differentiates from getTokenSplashUserActivityParams by its list focus.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to use it ('browse available Token Splash activities or look up a specific project by code') and maps the key filters (status, projectId, cursor+limit). It does not name alternatives or list exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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