ncloud_sourcebuild_list_projects

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, and the description does not contradict it. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond listing, such as the ability to filter by name and paginate, but these are also captured in the schema. No additional side effects or limitations are disclosed.

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 sentence of eight words, front-loading the core action and resource. It avoids unnecessary detail while summarizing the key optional features.

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 operation with all parameters documented and a read-only annotation, the description is adequate. It doesn't describe the return format, but the action 'list' implies a collection, and no output schema exists. However, it could be slightly more specific about what project information is returned, so a 4 rather than 5.

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% with descriptions for all three parameters (pageNo, pageSize, projectName). The description reinforces these with the phrases 'name filter' and 'pagination' but does not add new semantic details beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's action ('List') and resource ('SourceBuild projects'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_sourcebuild_get_project which retrieves a single project. The mention of optional filters and pagination adds scope clarity.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for listing SourceBuild projects, but does not name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, such as using ncloud_sourcebuild_get_project for single-project details.

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