list_projects

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

The description adds licensing requirement beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, and explains downstream use of project IDs. It does not cover pagination behavior or output format, but adds useful context.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose and condition; second explains output usage. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 simplicity and no output schema, the description covers main aspects: purpose, licensing requirement, and typical usage of outputs. Could be more explicit about return format, but adequate.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter maxItems already described. The tool description does not elaborate on this parameter beyond the schema, providing no additional semantic value.

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 'List projects on the instance' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_project, delete_project, etc. It also adds context about licensing and usage of project IDs.

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 provides context on when to use the tool (needs licensed Projects feature) and how project IDs are used by other tools, implying usage. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or direct alternatives.

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