project_listLists Lizard projects and optionally filters results to a specific workspace ID for focused project discovery.
Use this when the user wants to see their Lizard projects, optionally filtered to one workspace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspaceId | No | Filter to this workspace ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is fully covered. The description adds only the optional-workspace scoping note, with nothing about result limits, ordering, or pagination.
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?
One front-loaded sentence with the trigger condition first and the filter scope second; no filler at all.
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 zero-required-parameter, read-only list tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, this is close to sufficient. The only omission is any hint of what a project record contains or how results are ordered.
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?
There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Filter to this workspace ID'), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description's 'optionally filtered to one workspace' merely restates it, which is the baseline case.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('see their Lizard projects') plus the filtering scope, so the agent can tell it lists projects rather than creating/deleting them. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the adjacent workspace_list sibling, which is the only plausible confusion.
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?
'Use this when the user wants to see their projects' gives a clear triggering intent but names no alternatives or exclusions — an agent deciding between project_list, workspace_list, and domain_owned_list gets no routing guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.