Group Projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds context about optional search filtering and group scope, which is useful behavioral detail. It does not mention pagination behavior (implied by 'first' and 'after' params) or rate limits, but with annotations provided, this is acceptable.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List projects inside a GitLab group') and adds a clarifying modifier ('optionally filter by search term'). There is zero waste or redundancy.

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 moderate complexity (5 parameters, 1 required), rich annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and 100% schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It lacks output details (no output schema provided), but for a list operation with good annotations, this 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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description mentions optional search term filtering, which aligns with the 'searchTerm' parameter but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('projects inside a GitLab group'), and specifies optional filtering by search term. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_projects' (which likely lists all projects) and 'search_projects' (which searches across all projects) by focusing on group-scoped listing.

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 when you need to list projects within a specific group, optionally filtered. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like 'get_projects' (general project listing) or 'search_projects' (global search), nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing group access).

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