Get Projects

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

The description claims to fetch 'all projects' but does not disclose that the keyword parameter can filter results. This omission could mislead an agent into expecting an unfiltered list in all cases. No annotations exist to compensate for the lack of behavioral detail.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It wastes no words, though it omits important details.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description is under-specified. It fails to mention the filtering capability, leading to an incomplete picture. The absence of usage guidance further reduces completeness for an agent deciding when to invoke the 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?

The input schema provides a detailed, 100% description of the keyword parameter, including matching behavior and case insensitivity. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Fetches') and clearly identifies the resource ('all projects within the Linear organization'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that operate on different resources (issues, users).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools work on different resources, but there is no explicit mention of when to choose get_projects or when to avoid it.

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