List Projects

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a read-only operation but does not mention potential behaviors like pagination, rate limits, or auth beyond implicit user context. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Well-structured with purpose sentence, bulleted usage, return list, and tip. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words. Front-loaded key information.

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 with no parameters and an output schema, the description fully covers return fields (id, name, color, etc.) and provides actionable tip linking to sibling tools, making it complete for the context.

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 in input schema (schema coverage 100%). Per rule, baseline 4 for 0 params. Description does not add parameter info but correctly indicates no input needed.

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 'Retrieve all projects for the current user' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_project' (single) and 'get_project_data' (complete data) via the usage section and tip.

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?

Explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section provides clear use cases: overview, finding project ID, checking metadata. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but tip suggests alternatives like 'get_project_data' for complete data.

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