org_acls

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a read-only list operation, mentions returned fields, and states authentication requirements. Does not discuss pagination or limits, but acceptable for likely small result set.

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 sentences: first clearly states action and output, second provides usage advice. No unnecessary words, perfectly concise.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, description adequately explains return fields and usage context. Covers all necessary information without gaps.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline score of 4 applies as description adds no parameter info beyond schema.

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?

Description explicitly states it lists org-level ACLs, specifies returned fields (orgName, currency, paymentModel, roleNames), and explains its purpose to discover the orgId. No sibling tools deal with ACLs, making it unique.

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?

Clearly advises using this tool to discover orgId for ASA_ORG_ID, and notes it does not require X-AP-Context. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient.

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