asana_search_projects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It mentions 'search' and 'pattern matching' but doesn't disclose critical traits like whether results are paginated, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the output format looks like (especially important without an output schema).

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 with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes the key constraint (name pattern matching). Every element earns its place.

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 search tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., pagination, error handling), usage guidance relative to siblings, and any mention of output structure, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 4 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying 'name_pattern' uses regular expressions (which is already in the schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Search for projects') and resource ('in Asana') with the specific method 'using name pattern matching'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'asana_get_project' (singular retrieval) and 'asana_search_tasks' (different resource), but doesn't explicitly contrast with other project-related tools like 'asana_get_project_statuses'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description doesn't mention when to prefer this over 'asana_get_project' (for specific projects) or 'asana_list_workspaces' (for broader context), nor does it specify prerequisites like needing workspace access.

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