peaka_list_projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating no side effects. The description adds that it lists 'all projects accessible for the user,' which aligns. No additional behavioral details are provided, but the annotations cover the main safety aspect.

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, directly stating the purpose and usage. No unnecessary words, and the key action is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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 description is complete for a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. It explains what it does and why to use it. Minor omission: it does not describe the return format, but the tool name implies a list of projects.

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% description coverage for the single 'search' parameter, including its behavior (optional case-insensitive filter). The tool description does not add any additional parameter information, so the schema carries the full burden.

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 all projects accessible for the user' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by indicating this is the tool to discover projectIds, which no other sibling does.

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 explicitly says 'Use this tool to discover projectIds, then pass the chosen projectId to subsequent tool calls,' providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but given its unique role, this is sufficient.

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