list_orgs

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the global scope ('on the Forgejo instance') but omits potential authentication requirements, performance implications, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema implies. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Single sentence of 6 words, front-loaded with key action and scope. No fluff, every word earns its place. However, it might be considered too terse for full clarity.

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 (list with two optional parameters) and absence of output schema, the description provides the core purpose and scope. However, it does not explicitly state that it returns a list or mention pagination, which could be helpful for completeness.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning for the 'page' and 'limit' parameters beyond what is already in the schema. No additional context or examples are provided.

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 clearly states the tool lists all organizations on the Forgejo instance. The verb 'list' and resource 'organizations' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_org' (single) or 'list_user_orgs' (user-specific).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_user_orgs' or 'get_org'. The description lacks context for exclusive use or prerequisites, leaving the agent without decision support.

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