jira_project_list

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

The description adds that the tool 'Returns YAML' and mirrors a CLI command, which provides some behavioral context beyond the schema. However, without annotations, it does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, or that it's read-only. The information is useful but sparse.

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 two sentences, directly stating the function and output format. No extraneous information; every part serves a purpose.

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?

Given the simple input schema (one optional parameter) and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states the action and output format. Could mention that it returns all accessible projects or the default limit behavior, but it's adequate.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'limit', and its schema description is clear. The tool description does not add further insight beyond the schema, so the baseline score applies.

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 'List JIRA projects,' which is a specific verb and resource. It also mentions it returns YAML and mirrors a CLI command, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like jira_create, jira_edit, etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., jira_search, jira_board_list). The description does not provide context about when listing all projects is appropriate or when to use other JIRA tools.

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