list_projects

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('List all projects') and the lack of annotations means the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the behavior without misleading side effects. No hidden behavior is suggested.

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 with clear structure. It contains no redundant words and precisely communicates the tool's action.

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 tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know to invoke it correctly. It states the action and the data source sufficiently.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description doesn't need to add meaning to them. The baseline score of 4 applies as the description provides no extra context for parameters, which is acceptable for a parameterless tool.

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 the tool's function: 'List all projects from Clockodo API.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'all projects' distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_users or list_customers.

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 purpose is self-evident and the context is clear for a simple list operation. While it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives, the resource name and lack of parameters make the usage obvious. No explicit exclusions are needed.

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