abx_get_all_action_run_projections

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that projections are a lightweight UI representation, but says nothing about pagination defaults, ordering, or result size limits — and notably the required 'projection' flag makes the naming slightly confusing given the endpoint's own purpose.

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?

Three short, front-loaded lines with no padding. There is mild redundancy between 'Fetch all action run projections' and 'Retrieves projections of all action runs', which keeps it from a 5.

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 read-only list endpoint with full schema coverage and complete annotations, the description supplies everything needed to select and invoke it, including the lightweight/UI intent and the underlying route.

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 page, size and projection are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantics about paging behavior, acceptable values, or why projection is required despite the tool already returning projections.

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 and resource (fetch/retrieve action run projections) and clarifies the payload is a lightweight representation for UI use. This distinguishes it in substance from siblings like abx_get_action_run_by_id or abx_get_action_runs_by_action_id, though it never names them explicitly.

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 'lightweight representation for UI' note implies when this tool is preferable to full-entity retrieval, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement or reference to the filtered/bulk siblings. Guidance is inferable rather than stated.

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