ncloud_sens_list_projects

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint:true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: the structure of service IDs (NRN form), the useMail flag, and the 'mail-<UUID>' naming for migrated projects. No contradictions.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main action, then adds relevant contextual details about the output fields and naming conventions. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description provides a solid picture of what to expect: per-channel service IDs, the useMail marker, and naming for migrated projects. It also ties to downstream tools. Minor gap: it does not describe pagination behavior, but that is covered by the parameter schema.

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 description coverage is 100% for all three parameters (pageSize, pageIndex, projectName), including ranges and defaults. The description does not add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, so it stays at the baseline for full 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 SENS projects' with the API endpoint, and explains the purpose of the output (service IDs used by other tools). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ncloud_sens_list_alimtalk_channels by focusing on projects, not channels, and by linking to downstream 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 when to use it: when you need project-level service IDs for SMS/Alimtalk/Mail tools. It mentions the useMail flag and naming convention for migrated projects, which helps agents decide if this is the right tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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