freshbooks_list_projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read. The description adds a valuable behavioral detail—'works even when the business has no accounting account'—which is not captured in annotations and gives insight into the tool's edge-case behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous wording, and the core purpose is front-loaded. The businessId note is a bit awkwardly placed but the overall structure is efficient and readable.

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 list tool, the description covers the key differentiator (businessId) but leaves pagination behavior undocumented and does not mention the return format. The businessId reference is ambiguous without a schema parameter, creating a gap in understanding how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain the two actual parameters (page, per_page) at all. Instead, it introduces 'businessId', which is not present in the schema, potentially confusing an agent into looking for a nonexistent parameter. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 'List' and the resource 'projects for the business', distinguishing it from sibling tools like freshbooks_get_project. The explicit mention of 'Uses businessId (not accountId)' further differentiates it from other list tools that might rely on accountId, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides a clear guideline on which identifier to use (businessId not accountId) and notes the tool works even without an accounting account, giving context for when it's appropriate. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like list_services, though the ID distinction is a key usage clue.

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