List Available Docs

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

With readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint already declared, the description adds useful context about the return format (list of dicts with 'name' and 'description') and the empty-list behavior. It does not contradict annotations and provides extra value beyond the structured hints.

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 compact and well-organized into three clear sections: the action, usage directive, and return value. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler, and key information appears upfront.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does, how to use it in the broader workflow, and what the expected output looks like. It covers all necessary context within its simple scope.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema confirms this with an empty properties object. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on output semantics rather than parameter details, so no additional parameter information is needed.

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 states a specific action ('List all configured documentation projects') and clearly differentiates from sibling tools by explicitly naming get_project_docs and instructing to call this first. The verb and resource are specific, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use guidance ('Always call this first') and describes the exact workflow for passing the result to get_project_docs. This is a clear directive that leaves no ambiguity about the tool's role relative to alternatives.

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