vela_list_project_targets

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the behavioral context of verifying target legitimacy before deployment, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 simplicity (1 required param), the description is adequate but lacks details on output format or error handling. The presence of an output schema is mentioned but not shown, so description could be more complete.

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 0% (context signal), and the description does not add meaning beyond the schema. It mentions the API endpoint but does not explain parameters or their usage.

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 it lists delivery targets for a specified project, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vela_list_targets by scoping to a project.

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 context (before deployment) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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