List Script Projects

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

Annotations already mark this tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds context about using Drive API to find Apps Script files, which informs the agent about the underlying mechanism. No contradictions, and the additional detail justifies a score of 4.

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 description is two sentences long, concise, and front-loaded with the core function. No extraneous information, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given the simple list operation, the presence of annotations, and the output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior. It mentions the method (Drive API) and scope (accessible to user), leaving details like pagination and output structure to the schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with all parameters described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'Lists' and the resource 'Google Apps Script projects accessible to the user'. It also distinguishes from siblings like 'create_script_project' and 'get_script_project' by specifying the scope and the use of Drive API.

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 does not explicitly provide usage guidelines or when-not-to-use scenarios. It implies usage through purpose but lacks explicit comparisons to alternatives or conditions, earning a score of 3 for clear but unstated context.

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