retrieve_all_extensions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must stand alone. It implies a read-only retrieval but does not disclose potential behaviors like authentication requirements, response format, or edge cases (e.g., empty list).

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. Every word is necessary—no fluff. The parameter explanation is integrated efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basics but fails to mention what the output contains (e.g., list of extension objects) or any limitations.

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 100% coverage with a description identical to the tool's description. The schema already documents the parameter meaning, so the description adds no additional value beyond restating.

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 verb 'retrieves' and the resource 'all extensions' with context specification. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'retrieve_extension' (single) and 'create_extension'.

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 specifies the two valid contexts ('org' and 'partner'), guiding the agent on scope. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to alternatives like 'retrieve_extension'.

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