project_list

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

No annotations are provided, but the description indicates a read-only operation (listing projects) and returns a JSON list. It does not explicitly state side effects, but the behavior is inherently transparent for a list action.

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: two sentences that cover purpose and return format without any redundant information. Every sentence is essential.

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 no parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers the tool's functionality, including the list of returned fields. No additional information is needed.

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?

With zero parameters and schema coverage at 100%, the description adds value by specifying the return fields, which compensates for the lack of parameters. Baseline 4 applies per the rule for zero parameters.

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 explicitly states 'List all projects' and details the return fields (name, status, type, tags, timestamps), making the purpose clear and specific.

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?

While the description implies use for listing all projects, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like project_get or project_create. However, the context is clear given the tool's simplicity.

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