list_projects

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that results are in Capsule's default order and no sort parameter is supported. This is useful but could mention pagination behavior beyond schema.

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 efficient sentences: first states purpose and filter, second directs to alternatives. No waste, front-loaded.

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 tool with clear annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filter, ordering, and sibling differentiation. Could mention return data format but not critical. Nearly complete.

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 only 25% (one param has description). Description adds that status is optional and filtered by it, but does not explain the other three parameters (page, embed, perPage). Partially compensates but insufficient for low 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?

Clearly states 'List projects in Capsule CRM, optionally filtered by status.' Distinguishes itself from search_projects and filter_projects, which are used for different query types.

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 tells when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'For free-text matching use search_projects; for structured queries — use filter_projects instead.' Also clarifies no sort parameter is supported.

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