gcp_list_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It notes 'accessible by the configured service account', implying authentication context. However, it does not disclose whether it is read-only, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits beyond the obvious list operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence earns its place. No redundant information.

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 and simple list functionality, the description is fairly complete. It explains what the tool does and gives a filter example. However, it does not describe the return format (e.g., list of project IDs or objects), which could be helpful.

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 descriptions for filter and pageSize. The description adds value by providing a concrete example ('state:ACTIVE'), which is not in the schema. This helps the agent understand the filter parameter's usage.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all GCP projects accessible by the configured service account', providing a specific verb and resource. It implies differentiation from siblings like gcp_get_project (single project) but does not explicitly distinguish it.

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?

Includes a usage tip: 'Use filter='state:ACTIVE' to see only active projects.' This guides the agent on a common filter. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among siblings.

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