openstack_list_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly implies a read-only operation, which is positive, and clarifies the projects/tenants terminology. However, it does not disclose any access requirements, scope limitations (e.g., domain/project scope), or potential response traits beyond 'list'.

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 that front-loads the key information. There is no redundancy or filler, making it easy to parse quickly.

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, but the description is thin. It doesn't explain why device_id is needed or any scope/domain details for the project list. While not broken, it relies heavily on the parameter name and the tool's name to convey meaning, which is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter device_id with 'OpenStack device ID'. The description adds no additional meaning or context about how this parameter is used, which is acceptable given the schema handles it.

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 'List projects/tenants' with the specific resource 'OpenStack (Keystone)'. This distinguishes it from sibling OpenStack tools that list servers, flavors, or other resources, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 versus the many sibling list tools. There is no mention of prerequisites beyond the required device_id, nor any indication of how the device_id relates to the OpenStack instance. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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