list_project_packages

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state safety or side effects. It also does not mention authentication requirements, error behavior, or rate limits. The description is minimally adequate for a simple 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the tool's core purpose and output information. Ideal front-loading.

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?

For a tool with one integer parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic action and return information. However, it lacks details on the return format, error handling, and any behavioral nuances. It is minimally complete given the low complexity.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the 'project_id' parameter at all. It fails to add any meaning beyond the schema, which already shows it is a required integer. The description should clarify the parameter's role or constraints.

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 lists npm packages with version and update info. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('npm packages enabled for a project'). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_catalog' or 'list_assets', leaving ambiguity about scope.

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 alternatives like 'add_package' or 'remove_package'. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as project existence or permissions, nor are there any examples of appropriate contexts. The description lacks any usage direction.

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