List Projects

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It implies read-only behavior (listing) and mentions optional filtering. Does not explicitly state nondestructive nature, but the action is inherently safe. Lacks detail on rate limits or auth, but these are likely not needed for a local tool.

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?

Three sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, usage guidance, optional filter. Front-loaded with primary action. No wasted words.

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 one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers location, output fields, usage context, and filter behavior. No gaps identified given the tool's complexity.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying that the 'query' parameter performs a substring filter on projectId or description, which is more specific than the schema's 'filter by substring'.

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 ('Lists'), identifies the resource ('projects in ~/.mcp-architector'), and lists output fields. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which operate on entries, modules, or slices.

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 when to call this tool ('Call first when tools return empty/wrong project') and why (workspace path normalization). Provides a concrete example. Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the context is clear.

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