appknox_organizations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that only organizations accessible to the authenticated user are returned, which is a useful scoping detail. However, it omits other behavioral aspects such as pagination, response format, or sorting, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 that contains no redundant information. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose without any waste.

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, parameterless list tool, the description adequately conveys the core function and user scoping. However, the absence of an output schema means the agent must infer the return structure, and no details about pagination or rate limits are provided, leaving minor gaps.

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 the input schema is empty. The description accurately implies there are no configuration options, and since there are no parameters to document, the baseline score of 4 applies.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('organizations'), and the scope ('accessible to the authenticated user'), making it easy for an agent to select it. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like appknox_projects and appknox_files, which operate on different resources.

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 implies usage when listing organizations but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like appknox_projects or appknox_whoami. There are no exclusion criteria or named alternatives, so the agent must infer from the resource name.

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