list_projects

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only. Returns JSON array of projects,' disclosing the read-only nature and return type. Does not mention potential side effects or pagination, but for a zero-parameter list operation this is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences: first states purpose and outputs, second provides usage guidance, third adds behavioral info. No unnecessary words, all content earns its place.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, usage context, and read-only nature. No gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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; schema coverage is 100% (empty). Description confirms no inputs needed, adding no extra semantics but meeting baseline for zero parameters.

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), resource (projects), scope (all in your organization), and specifies returned fields (status, competitor count, last monitored timestamp). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly saying 'Start here' and indicating that this tool provides projectId values needed by others.

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?

Explicitly says 'Start here — call this first to discover available projectId values required by all other tools,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is well-established.

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