todoist_get_projects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns 'a formatted string' but doesn't describe what that formatting includes, whether there's pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 appropriately brief with two sentences that directly address purpose and return value. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and avoids unnecessary elaboration, though the 'Returns:' formatting could be slightly more integrated.

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 tool's simplicity (0 parameters, read-only operation) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose adequately. However, for a tool with no annotations, it should provide more behavioral context about authentication, rate limits, or what 'formatted string' means to be fully complete.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the empty parameter set. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter information beyond what the schema provides, maintaining a clean baseline for parameterless tools.

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 'Get' and resource 'list of all projects from Todoist', making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like todoist_get_project (singular) by specifying 'all projects', but doesn't explicitly contrast with other list tools like todoist_get_tasks.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention when this tool is appropriate versus todoist_get_project (for a specific project) or todoist_get_tasks (for tasks), nor does it discuss prerequisites or context for usage.

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