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 adds the API endpoint (GET /2.0/pr_project) and notes pagination/ordering support. This is useful but does not disclose behavior beyond the schema (e.g., no mention of rate limits, error handling, or default limit).

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 sentence that immediately states the purpose and key features. Every word is necessary; no fluff 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?

For a list endpoint with 3 parameters fully described in the schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core actions (list, paginate, order) but lacks details like default/behavioral traits. Given no output schema, additional context about return format would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100% and the input schema already describes all three parameters with clear descriptions. The description reinforces pagination and ordering but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 'List projects from bexio' which is a specific verb (list) and resource (projects). It differentiates from sibling tools like bexio_get_project (single project) and bexio_search_projects (search) by using 'list' rather than 'get' or 'search'.

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 mentions 'Supports pagination and ordering', which implies the tool can handle large result sets and sort results, providing some guidance on when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer list over search or provide context about use cases.

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