seed_list_orgs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It discloses the required authentication method (token or password), which is useful context beyond the schema. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, how pagination behaves, or what response format to expect, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 two sentences with no wasted words; the main purpose is front-loaded and the auth requirement is clearly appended. It earns its length for a simple listing tool.

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 tool with three optional parameters, the description covers the core action and authentication. However, the absence of an output schema, low parameter documentation coverage, and lack of pagination/filter behavior details make it only minimally complete.

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 only 33% (only filtersJson has a description), and the tool description adds no parameter-level meaning. pageSize and pageNumber have constraints but no explanatory text, and the description does not compensate for the low coverage by explaining pagination or filter usage.

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 the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('registered Seed organizations'), and the tool name disambiguates it from sibling list tools for frames, tables, views, and documents. It clearly distinguishes a read operation from the create/update/delete sibling tools.

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 states what the tool does and an auth prerequisite, but offers no guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling tools are mentioned or contrasted, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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