List Keka PSA Projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the bar for additional disclosure is lower. The description adds useful behavioral context by describing the return payload fields (ID, name, client, status, dates, budget, currency, project manager) and output format options, going beyond the structured annotations.

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 docstring-style Args/Returns layout is scannable and the opening sentence clearly states the tool's purpose. It repeats some parameter information already in the schema, but the structure remains compact and easy to parse.

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 paginated list tool, the description combined with the full schema and annotations covers everything needed to call it correctly. The description fills the gap left by the missing output schema by listing the returned fields and noting the default response format.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates pageNumber, pageSize, and response_format with defaults matching the schema, but does not add substantial extra meaning such as ordering behavior, date formats, or currency details.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and clearly identifies the resource as 'projects from Keka's Professional Services Automation (PSA) module'. This distinguishes the tool from siblings like keka_list_psa_clients by naming 'projects' as the entity type, leaving no ambiguity about what is returned.

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 what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as keka_list_psa_clients or other list tools. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or situations where this tool should or should not be chosen.

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