list_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it offers no details about output format, scope, authentication, or what 'registered services' means. The description does not go beyond the basic action and leaves behavioral expectations unstated.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words, but the brevity sacrifices important context and contributes to the ambiguity with sibling tools.

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 no-parameter, low-complexity list tool, the description is nearly minimal, but it is incomplete in context: it fails to clarify the relationship between 'projects' and 'services' and does nothing to distinguish itself from list_services. Without an output schema, the description should provide more context about the return value.

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, so parameter semantics are automatically satisfied. The description does not need to compensate for undocumented parameters because 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 states a clear action ('List all registered services') but the resource ('services') does not match the tool name ('projects'), and the sibling list_services likely duplicates this exact action. This mismatch and lack of differentiation make the purpose misleading rather than clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only provides a bare action phrase, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context and compare against siblings like list_services on its own.

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