shortcut_list_projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that baseline: no pagination behavior, no workspace/team scoping, no note on result size or rate limits for a list operation.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, with no filler. Conciseness is genuinely good, though it is short because content is missing rather than because it is tightly edited.

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 exists, so the description should say something about what comes back (fields, pagination, whether archived projects are included) and it says none of it. For a list tool on a project-management API this leaves meaningful gaps for correct invocation and result handling.

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, api_token, documented at 100% schema coverage, so the schema carries the full burden. The description adds no meaning beyond 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 ('List Shortcut projects'), and the resource is distinct from siblings like shortcut_list_epics and shortcut_search_stories. It lacks any statement of scope or output shape, so it stops short of the top score.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus shortcut_list_epics or shortcut_search_stories, and no indication of prerequisites beyond the API token. The agent must infer the context entirely.

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