productive-mcp-rb2

list_projects

list_projects

Read-onlyIdempotent

List projects from your Productive account, filtered by status or company, to view relevant project information.

Instructions

List projects in your Productive organisation. Filter by status or company.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	No	Filter by project status
`company_id`	No	Filter projects by company ID
`limit`	No	Number of projects to return (1-200)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projects`	Yes
`returned`	Yes
`total`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0-alpha.7May 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds no further behavioral context (e.g., error handling, pagination), but does not contradict annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by filtering options. Highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool (3 optional parameters), the description covers the essential functionality and filtering. No missing context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description adding 'Filter by status or company' merely summarizes existing schema info. It does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'projects' within the Productive organisation. It also mentions filtering by status or company, which distinguishes it from other list_* tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for listing projects and filtering, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. It is adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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

Deploy Server