printix_get_tenant

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The word 'Get' plus the stated output (tenant ID and API root link) clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation with no side effects. This is sufficient transparency for a zero-parameter tool, though it does not mention failure modes or auth requirements beyond the implicit credential scoping.

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 entire definition is a single concise sentence that delivers the core purpose and output information without waste. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 getter with no output schema, the description provides the essential information: what it retrieves and what it returns. Nothing critical 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline of 4 applies because the description adds no parameter-related detail, but none is needed.

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 ('Get') and names a distinct resource ('the Printix tenant'), which clearly sets it apart from sibling tools that operate on workstations, users, groups, printers, sites, etc. It also clarifies that the returned data is scoped to the current credential pair, giving a precise sense of what is being retrieved.

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 context is clear: this tool is for retrieving the tenant associated with the current credentials. It does not explicitly list alternatives or say when not to use it, but with no parameters and a unique resource among siblings, the usage context is strong enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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