List Organizations

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that the operation lists all organizations and implies it is a read operation (no mention of side effects). However, it does not disclose potential behaviors like pagination, ordering, or error conditions. For a zero-parameter tool, this is adequate but minimal.

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 consists of two succinct sentences. The first sentence conveys the core function, and the second adds essential context. Every sentence is valuable, and there is no redundancy or extraneous information.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does (list organizations), the scope (for the authenticated user), and the role of organizations (top-level entity). No further details are necessary given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not add any parameter-related information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool lists organizations for the authenticated user, using the verb 'lists' and specifying the resource 'organizations'. It differentiates from sibling tools (e.g., list_contacts, list_conversations) by noting organizations are the top-level entity, making its purpose distinct.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('lists all organizations the authenticated user belongs to') and provides context ('Organizations are the top-level entity in Missive'). However, it does not explicitly mention situations where this tool should be avoided or alternatives, though no alternatives exist for listing organizations.

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