list_organization_departments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation but does not state whether the list is paginated, sorted, or includes nested departments. It also fails to mention behavior under invalid parameters or rate limits.

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, short sentence that is efficient but lacks structure. It gets straight to the point but could benefit from additional context or formatting to improve readability without being verbose.

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 simple list operation with a well-documented schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, given the lack of annotations and output schema, it fails to fully set expectations about pagination, filtering behavior, or error responses, leaving the agent partially uninformed.

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?

All parameters are already documented in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no new semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not detract but also does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 verb 'get' and resource 'departments' within an organization, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_organization_department_info' which focuses on a single department. However, it could be more specific about whether it returns all departments or just top-level ones.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that 'get_organization_department_info' is for retrieving a single department or that 'get_organization_department_ancestors' is for hierarchical queries. This lack of context forces the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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