list_tenants

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 communicates that only active tenants are returned, which is a useful scoping detail. However, it does not mention potential pagination, ordering, authentication, or whether the full list is always returned at once.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the core behavior. Every word earns its place, with no redundant phrasing or unnecessary details.

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 parameterless read-only list tool, the description adequately conveys what the tool does and what it returns. While there is no output schema describing the structure of a tenant, this is a minor omission for such a simple tool and the description is otherwise sufficient for correct invocation.

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 there is no schema detail for the description to augment. Per the baseline for 0-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description correctly adds nothing because nothing is needed.

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 ('Returns') and a specific resource ('all active tenants on the ChopChop platform'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_products, get_orders, and add_item, which target 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 intended use is implied by the resource name and description: if you need tenant data, use this tool. However, it never explicitly states when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or related tools.

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