List Zendesk Organizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the return shape (name/id plus basic fields) and that results are cursor-paginated, though it doesn't mention rate limits or page-size behavior beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and pagination, followed by alternatives and a brief domain note. Dense and mostly waste-free, though the closing sentence about organizations grouping end users is useful context rather than strictly essential.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately fills the gap by naming returned fields and pagination semantics. It is nearly complete for a simple list tool; only finer pagination termination details are absent, which the cursor parameter largely covers.

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 100% and both parameters (cursor, page_size) are fully documented in the schema. The description only restates 'with pagination' and adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields, so baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all organizations with pagination') and immediately names the returned fields, then explicitly distinguishes itself from get_organization and search. An agent can select this over its siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit alternatives and the condition selecting each: use get_organization with an id for full details (tags, domains, notes), or search for query-based lookups by name. This is a clear when-to-use-this vs when-to-use-something-else routing.

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