list_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds a behavioral nuance by specifying 'current account' (scoping) and the verb 'List' implies a read-only action. However, it doesn't explicitly mention auth requirements, rate limits, or that it's non-mutating beyond what the verb implies.

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?

A single sentence with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the action ('List') and immediately states the resource and scope. Perfectly concise.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters) and an output schema exists, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. The 'current account' scope is useful. It could mention authentication or a use case, but it's sufficient for a basic listing tool.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed since there are no parameters.

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 'List all projects in the current account' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('projects') with a clear scope ('current account'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_bucket_files or info by naming the exact resource.

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 when you need to see projects in the current account, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions or specific context provided, so it just meets the 'implied usage' baseline.

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