sprrint_projects_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states 'List visible projects' and discloses nothing about return shape, pagination, sorting, or the meaning of 'visible.' There is no mention of side effects or permissions, though the listing action itself is likely read-only.

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 a single succinct sentence with no filler or redundant content. Every word earns its place and the core action is front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to grasp quickly.

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, invocation is trivial, but the absence of an output schema and the lack of any description of the return value leaves a gap. The agent must infer what a 'visible project' is and what fields are returned. This is acceptable for a simple list call, but not 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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully defines the input (none). Per the calibration guideline, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 4 because there is nothing for the description to clarify about 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 states the verb 'List' and a specific resource 'visible projects', clearly distinguishing it from sibling project tools like get, create, update, and delete. However, the qualifier 'visible' is not defined, leaving some ambiguity about which projects are shown.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It only contains the phrase 'List visible projects,' which implies the use case but does not mention any sibling tools, exclusions, or conditions that would help an agent choose between this and projects_get or other list tools.

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