list_organizations

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds the actual response envelope ({total, offset, has_more, items}), the page-size bounds (default 20, max 200), and the fact that `contains` filters server-side on the items' own fields. That is material behavior an agent needs and cannot get from the annotations.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences with no filler, and the most important instruction (call first) leads. The `contains` clause is information-dense with nested parentheticals, which slightly taxes readability but every clause carries information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by describing the pagination envelope and how to decide whether to page. Combined with the readOnlyHint annotation and the call-order guidance, an agent has everything needed to invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so the description must carry the load: it documents `limit` (default 20, max 200) and `contains` (server-side filter over item fields, with a CVE/product example). `offset` is only implied by the paging envelope, so one parameter remains under-explained.

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+resource ('List all organizations') and immediately positions the tool in the workflow ('Call this first to get the org_id other tools need'), which distinguishes it from every other list_* sibling that requires an org context.

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?

Explicitly prescribes calling order ('call this first') and the downstream reason (other tools need org_id). It also gives concrete filtering advice — use `contains` for server-side text filtering and check `total` before paging — so an agent knows exactly when and how to invoke it.

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