squally-list-projectsRetrieve your Squally organization's project IDs. Use this first to get the ID required for all other Squally CI tools.
Lists the projects in your Squally organization. Start here: every other tool needs a projectId, and this is the only tool that produces one.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| projects | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds the organizational scope and its unique role as the sole projectId source, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations. 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, zero filler. The action is front-loaded, and the crucial 'start here' guidance is placed immediately after the verb phrase, making the purpose instantly actionable.
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 0-parameter query tool with a safety profile covered by annotations and an output schema present, the description fully covers what an agent needs: what it does, why it matters, and when to call it. Nothing essential is missing.
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 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed—there is nothing to document.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Lists the projects in your Squally organization') and differentiates from siblings by noting it is the only tool that produces a projectId. An agent can immediately tell this from the run/error-focused sibling 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?
Explicitly instructs 'Start here' and justifies why: every other tool needs a projectId and only this tool produces one. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly rules out alternatives until a projectId is obtained.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.