harbor_list_projects

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, destructive, idempotent, and open-world hints. The description adds crucial behavioral context: sorting is per-page, pagination logic, and return structure, which goes beyond annotations.

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?

Description is concise (about 6 sentences) and well-structured. Front-loaded with main purpose, then usage guidance, pagination details, sorting caveat, and return format. No wasted words.

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 presence of annotations covering safety and idempotency, and an output schema (implied by return key listing), the description fully covers purpose, usage, pagination, sorting nuance, and return structure for a list tool.

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% with good parameter descriptions. The description adds some context about per-page sorting affecting results, but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 clearly states 'List Harbor projects' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by indicating it should be used first before harbor_list_repos and harbor_list_artifacts.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this first to discover which Harbor projects exist before drilling in with harbor_list_repos / harbor_list_artifacts.' Also provides pagination instructions.

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