add_child_organization

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says an add operation occurs, with no mention of permissions, side effects, duplicate handling, required preconditions, or whether changes are reversible.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, it is so minimal that it under-specifies behavior; brevity is achieved at the expense of useful context.

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 this is a mutation tool with three required parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete for reliable invocation. It does not explain the meaning of the parameters, prerequisites, or expected outcomes, even though an output schema exists.

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 0% and the description adds no parameter-level information. It does not clarify the meaning of domain_name or admin_email, leaving ambiguity about whether these refer to the child organization or the partner portal.

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 states a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('child organization to a partner portal'), making the core purpose clear. It is not a tautology and names a distinct context, though it does not elaborate on what a child organization is or how it relates to the partner portal.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios where it should be avoided. Sibling tools like add_user or add_domain exist, but the description does not distinguish this tool's use case from them.

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