cronos_lista_progetti

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the input parameters and their defaults (e.g., ultimi_giorni default 30), and the return value (list of projects with occurrences and dates). It doesn't describe side effects, but as a read-like query that is acceptable.

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 three paragraphs but very concise. It front-loads the purpose and then details parameters and return. No unnecessary information. Could be slightly more structured but overall efficient.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value adequately. All parameters are covered. The tool is simple (list projects) and the description provides enough context for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the fallback behavior: if no dates provided, it uses ultimi_giorni with a default of 30. This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 clearly states it lists projects mentioned in the diary over a period. It distinguishes from siblings like cronos_leggi_diario (reading full diary) and cronos_lista_mese (monthly list) by focusing specifically on projects.

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 says 'Utile per avere una panoramica dei progetti su cui si e' lavorato' (useful for an overview of projects worked on), giving clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough.

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