list_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does add value by disclosing that summary mode is the default and includes project tags, and that verbose=true fetches full data. It does not mention pagination or return format, but for a read-only list tool, this is sufficient behavioral context.

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 short sentences that are front-loaded with the main purpose, with zero wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple list tool with one boolean parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key behavior (summary vs full mode, tags in summary). The only minor gap is the lack of mention of pagination or sorting, but this is not critical given the tool's low complexity.

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 description explains the verbose parameter ('Set verbose=true for full project data') and implies the default summary mode, providing meaning beyond the bare boolean schema. This compensates well for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 all projects' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_project (single project) and list_tasks (different resource). It also adds useful context about summary mode and tags, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools.

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?

The description implies usage for listing projects and provides guidance on verbose mode, which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_project for a single project or list_tags for viewing tags, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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