List n8n Projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds pagination behavior via cursor, but does not elaborate on return format or potential edge cases, which is acceptable given the 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 extremely concise, with a one-sentence purpose followed by a clear parameter list. Every part is necessary and no words are wasted.

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 operation with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and parameters. The pagination mechanism is explained via the cursor parameter, and the annotations cover safety. It lacks details about returns but this is not critical given the absence of an output schema.

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 description adds semantic meaning to both parameters: limit is explained as 'Max results (1-250, default 20)' and cursor as 'Pagination cursor', providing conceptual context beyond the raw schema. This helps the agent understand the pagination model.

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 action ('List all projects') and the resource ('n8n instance'), making it specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like n8n_list_workflows and n8n_list_executions by naming the resource explicitly.

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 tool's purpose strongly implies when to use it: whenever a list of projects is needed. However, it does not explicitly provide alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and context.

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