List Projects

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing that the label adapts to businessMode (e.g., cases or work orders), which is not inferable from annotations alone.

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 concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and adds a relevant caveat. There is no wasted content, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 read-only list operation, the description fully covers the tool's behavior, especially with an output schema present and the businessMode adaptation noted. No significant missing context remains.

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 input schema already fully describes the single 'status' parameter with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat it. It adds no additional parameter semantics, hence a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with the verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'the user's projects', with a helpful note that labels adapt to businessMode (cases/work orders). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_clients.

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 states that it lists projects, which implies usage for project-related queries, but it does not explicitly provide when-to-use guidance, mention alternatives, or state when not to use it. The sibling tool list_clients exists, but the description itself does not differentiate.

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