list_project_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by saying 'Lists' and 'discover,' but it does not explicitly state the tool makes no modifications, nor does it mention any performance implications or permissions. This is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences, both essential: the first states what it does, the second states when to use it. No filler, no repetition, and it is front-loaded with the core function immediately.

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?

The tool is simple with only two optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the purpose and usage adequately, though it does not detail the return format. However, given the simplicity, this is near-complete; a full 5 would require a bit more detail on what the response structure looks like.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for 'includeBins' and 'includeMetadata', so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter guidance beyond that, leaving the agent to infer parameter usage from the schema alone.

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 a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('all media items, bins, and assets in the current Premiere Pro project'), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'list_sequences' or 'get_project_item_info' by its broad scope of 'all' items in the project.

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 clear usage context: 'Use this to discover available media before performing operations.' It implies this is the go-to discovery tool, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or reference alternatives, so it misses the top score.

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