wetrack_list_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses filtering, search, pagination, and the minimal mode behavior. However, it doesn't mention default sort order, whether results are paginated by default, or any rate limits. The description is honest but not deeply transparent about edge behaviors.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clean parameter list. Every line earns its place. Slightly verbose with the Args header, but overall 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?

For a list endpoint with 9 optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the key behaviors: filtering, search, pagination, and minimal mode. It doesn't explain return value structure, but the output schema exists. Missing explicit guidance on defaults (e.g., default sort) is a minor gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: each parameter gets a clear one-line explanation including allowed values for status and sort, and the minimal flag's effect. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('projects') with filtering, search, and pagination. It distinguishes from siblings like wetrack_get_project (single project) and wetrack_get_recent_projects (recent subset), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 usage for listing projects with various filters, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like wetrack_get_recent_projects or wetrack_search. The parameter list gives context but no explicit when/when-not guidance.

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