list_projects

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the extra behavior of showing the active project but does not explicitly state that it is read-only, nor does it mention any permissions or side effects. The verb 'list' implies safety, but explicit disclosure is absent.

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?

One sentence, no filler, front-loaded with the action and object. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable hint of the output: a list of available projects and the current active project. It does not specify ordering or pagination, but these are not expected for such a lightweight listing operation.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details. Nothing is missing here.

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 uses a specific verb 'list' with a clear resource 'projects' and also mentions showing the current active project, which adds precision. It distinguishes itself from mutations like activate_project/deactivate_project by focusing on read-only listing.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_project_info or list_project_snapshots. The description does not mention any exclusions or context where another tool would be preferred.

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