neon_list_projects

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'List all projects' without disclosing behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (despite a cursor parameter), whether results are ordered, API key authentication requirements (though key is in schema), or rate limits. The description carries the full burden for transparency but reveals very little beyond the basic action.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with zero wasted words. Every word contributes to understanding.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what the response contains (e.g., list of project IDs, names, status). For a tool with three parameters including pagination, the description is too sparse; it does not specify the response structure or how to handle pagination to retrieve all projects.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (api_key, limit, cursor). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all Neon Serverless Postgres projects in your account' – a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Neon Serverless Postgres projects') with account scope, distinguishing it from siblings like 'neon_get_project' (single project) and 'neon_list_branches' (branches inside a 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 implies usage for obtaining a list of all projects but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'neon_get_project' or 'neon_list_databases'. There is no when-not-to-use or alternative naming, so the guidance is only implied.

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