get_organisasi

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

With no annotations, the description only states the basic action (getting a list) and geographic scope. It does not disclose pagination behavior, filtering via the q parameter, default result sizes, or any potential side effects. The agent gains no insight into how the tool behaves under the hood.

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 description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to read.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not explain what a response contains or any usage nuances. It only states the basic purpose, leaving the agent without enough context for the tool's behavior and return values.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (q, page, per_page) already have descriptions in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Mendapatkan daftar organisasi/OPD... di Kabupaten Ngawi' (get list of organizations/OPD in Ngawi Regency). It uses a specific verb and resource, and differentiates it from sibling tools that focus on data, categories, and statistics.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives like search_data or get_data_sektoral. It does not mention any limitations, exclusions, or preferred use cases.

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