list_organization_releases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core function and provides no information on response format, pagination, sorting, permissions, or side effects, leaving the agent without expectations beyond the basic operation.

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 sentence that directly states the tool's function with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 one-parameter tool without an output schema, the description is adequate to understand the basic operation. However, it lacks details about the return payload, potential error conditions, or how it differs from the similarly named list_releases tool, which could leave ambiguity in more complex workflows.

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 already covers the only parameter 'id' with a clear description ('Organization ID'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds minimal semantic value by linking the parameter to 'a specific organization', but it does not offer additional syntax or context beyond the schema.

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 (releases), and the scope (belonging to a specific organization), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_releases. It is a specific and unambiguous statement of the tool's purpose.

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 the use case: when you need releases filtered by a specific organization. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., list_releases for all releases) or provide any exclusions or prerequisites, so guidance is only implicit.

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