List Projects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'List all projects,' implying a read operation but offering no details about output order, pagination, authentication, or side effects. For a minimal tool, this lacks transparency, though it does not contradict any annotations.

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, succinct sentence 'List all projects.' that is fully focused and front-loaded. Every word contributes to the purpose, with no redundant or filler content.

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 (no parameters, simple list operation) and the presence of an output schema (indicated in context), the description is adequate. It does not explain return values, but that is covered by the output schema. The only gap is lack of behavioral context, but for a basic list operation, this is acceptable.

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 schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). No parameter details are needed, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to add parameter information since there are none.

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 'List all projects' clearly specifies the verb 'list' and the resource 'projects', with the scope 'all' indicating a comprehensive retrieval. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_project, update_project, and delete_project by being the only tool for listing projects.

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 provides clear context that this tool is used to retrieve all projects, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives. Since there are no alternative project-listing tools among siblings, the guidance is implicit but sufficient for a simple list operation.

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