list_projects

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

The description declares the tool as a read-only list operation, but with no annotations provided, it does not mention potential side effects, pagination, or limits. For a simple list, this is adequate but lacks depth.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the purpose and scope with no unnecessary 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?

The tool is simple with no parameters, but the description could mention output format, pagination, or sorting to fully inform the agent. Given the simplicity, it is mostly complete.

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?

With zero parameters in the input schema (schema coverage 100%), the description adds value by clarifying that the list is scoped to projects owned by the authenticated user.

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 specifies the verb 'list', resource 'projects', and scope 'owned by the authenticated user', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_project or create_project.

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?

While the description implies using this tool to get all projects for the user, it offers no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like get_project or when not to use it.

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