vercel_list_projects

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

The description offers no behavioral details beyond the name. There are no annotations to supplement. Key traits like read-only nature, rate limits, pagination (implied by 'limit' param), or authorization requirements are completely omitted.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, which is appropriate for a simple tool. However, the conciseness comes at the cost of missing critical details that could be included without verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the function of the parameters, the scope of 'all projects', or what the response contains. The agent would need to guess or fail.

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?

Neither 'limit' nor 'api_key' are described in the description. The schema provides types but no semantic meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add any value for parameter understanding.

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 clear action ('List') and resource ('all Vercel projects'), providing a basic understanding of the tool's purpose. However, it does not differentiate from other Vercel list tools like vercel_list_deployments, nor does it clarify what 'all' means (e.g., all projects in the account or team).

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs sibling tools like vercel_list_deployments, or any context about prerequisites, authentication, or typical use cases.

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