Swagger: List Organizations

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those annotations by explaining access scope: regular users see their own organizations, while On-Premise admins see all organizations. No hidden side effects are implied.

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 opening sentence is front-loaded and clear. However, the 'Parameters' section duplicates the input schema, and the 'Toolset: Registry API' line adds limited value, so not every part of the description earns its place.

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 low-complexity, read-only list operation with zero required parameters, full schema coverage, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description provides the necessary missing context: who the results are scoped to and how admins differ. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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%, and the description's parameter block largely repeats the schema's descriptions verbatim. It adds no new detail such as defaults, valid enum values, or boundary semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get organizations') and clarifies scope by saying it returns the authenticating user's memberships, with a special case for On-Premise admins. It is clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling list tools such as swagger_list_portals.

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 intended use is implied by the name and the 'returns a list of organizations' phrasing, and the Toolset label gives context. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this endpoint versus alternatives (e.g., portal lists or search endpoints), nor any when-not-to-use guidance.

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