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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: token-scoped visibility rules and the underlying endpoint GET /organizers/.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with the returned fields and endpoint appended without waste.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully names the returned fields and explains the token-based visibility filter. It stops short of noting that pagination may be needed to retrieve the full list, a minor gap for a simple list tool.

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 100%, so page and page_size are already fully documented, including the next_page chaining hint. The description adds nothing about pagination, which is acceptable given the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list organizer accounts) plus the scope qualifier ('this API token can access') and the returned fields (slug, name, public URL). It is clearly distinguishable from the singular sibling pretix_get_organizer.

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?

Gives clear context for when this applies: enumerating organizers reachable by the current token, with the note that a team token sees only its own organizer. It does not explicitly name pretix_get_organizer as the alternative for fetching a single known organizer.

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