List GCP projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does convey that this is a read operation scoped to the caller's identity and it names the supported Cloud Resource Manager filter syntax. It does not disclose pagination behavior (despite pageSize/pageToken params), required permissions, or what happens on empty results.

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 short sentences with no filler; the purpose is front-loaded and the filter-syntax detail follows as supporting context. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 3-parameter, read-only passthrough listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate on purpose and filtering but silent on pagination, which is a real gap given two of the three params exist solely for paging.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add real value for `filter` by giving concrete syntax examples ("state:ACTIVE", "parent.id:1234567890"), but leaves `pageSize` and `pageToken` entirely undocumented, so only one of three parameters is covered.

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 ("Lists GCP projects") and narrows scope to projects "visible to the authenticated identity." It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the close siblings gcp_get_project or firebase_list_projects, so an agent must infer the list-vs-get and GCP-vs-Firebase split.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as gcp_get_project for a single project or firebase_list_projects for Firebase projects. The scope phrase implies the usage context but never states when this tool should be preferred.

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