list_group_projects_tool

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

注释未提供，描述仅简单说明'列出项目'，未披露任何行为细节，如分页、排序、权限要求或对资源的影响。虽然参数模式覆盖了分页等，但描述本身没有补充行为信息，对于无注释的工具，该描述承担的责任未完成。

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?

描述仅有一句话，简洁且直接点明核心功能，没有冗余内容。虽然缺乏结构化组织（如列表或段落），但作为一句简短说明，效率高。

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?

工具包含8个参数和输出模式，但描述仅提供最基本信息。尽管参数模式详细，描述未提及分页、过滤、子组等能力，也未说明典型使用场景。描述勉强覆盖核心功能，但对于一个拥有丰富模式参数的列表工具，描述可以更详尽，但未达到严重不足的程度。

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?

输入模式对所有8个参数提供了高覆盖率（100%）的描述，包括默认值和说明，因此描述无需额外解释参数。模式已承担主要解释责任，描述未添加新的语义信息，达到基线3分。

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?

描述明确说明了工具功能：列出GitLab组内的项目，动词'list'加上资源'projects within a GitLab group'，与兄弟工具list_projects_tool（可能列出所有项目）形成区分，并具体限定在组范围内。

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?

描述提供了明确的上下文（仅限组内项目），但未明确提及何时使用该工具而非其他替代工具（如list_projects_tool），也没有排除条件。但工具名称和描述已隐含使用场景，给予4分。

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