List Claude Design projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. The phrase 'you can open' adds context about access scoping, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe any side effects. The verb 'List' implies read-only, but a more explicit disclosure would be better.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core functionality, and includes a helpful usage hint. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with only one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains the key return fields (projectId and design system status) and gives usage guidance. It lacks only minor details such as return format or pagination, which are not critical for this straightforward list operation.

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 a single enum parameter and default value, so the schema already fully documents the parameter. The description does not mention the 'kind' parameter, but it is not required given the schema coverage. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('claude.ai/design project'), and specifies the output fields (projectId and design system flag). It clearly differentiates from siblings like list_chats or list_templates by focusing on projects, and even guides the user to 'start here'.

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 provides clear usage context by stating 'Start here to pick the right project', indicating when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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