list_deleted_projects

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

Consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). Adds value by revealing the `restrictedProjects` key in responses, informing the agent about potential partial data access. 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds unique value with no redundancy. Highly efficient.

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?

Covers purpose, required parameter, and a notable response feature. Lacks details on pagination behavior and full response structure, which would aid agent invocation. Adequate but incomplete for a list 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?

Adds meaning for the `since` parameter (required, ISO-8601 format) beyond the schema. However, it provides no explanation for `page` or `perPage`, which lack schema descriptions, leaving a gap for the agent.

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 identifies this as an audit feature for listing deleted projects by timestamp, distinguishing it from general listing tools like list_projects. However, it could further differentiate from sibling tools list_deleted_opportunities and list_deleted_parties.

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?

Explicitly states that the `since` parameter is required, providing a clear usage constraint. Does not indicate when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives, leaving some room for confusion about appropriate context.

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