memorybank_discover_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, what format the results are in, or any side effects. The description is limited to the purpose and does not explain what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. Every word adds value: it states the core action and a typical use case. No extraneous information is present.

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?

Given the tool has one optional parameter with full schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat adequate but lacks behavioral transparency and usage guidelines. It provides the basic purpose but does not fully describe what the agent can expect from the tool's output or how to integrate it with other tools.

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 schema coverage is 100% for the single query parameter, and the schema description already explains it is a search term by ID, description, or keywords. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 clearly states the tool discovers other projects in the local Memory Bank ecosystem. It uses a specific verb ('Descubre') and resource ('otros proyectos indexados'). While it distinguishes from siblings by focusing on discovering projects rather than searching or managing tasks, it does not explicitly contrast with similar tools like memorybank_search or memorybank_get_project_docs, so it is slightly above average.

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 only implicitly suggests usage via 'Útil para coordinar tareas entre proyectos', which gives a vague use case but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like memorybank_search or memorybank_get_project_docs. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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