abx_get_all_provisioning_endpoints

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the unusual claim that this is a "Proxy" call and that results are scoped to an organization, without explaining pagination, response shape, or how organization scope is determined when no parameter exists.

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 short lines, yet the first two say the same thing ("fetch" / "Retrieves") and the third just restates the HTTP route already present in the annotation title. Front-loaded but partly redundant.

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?

A parameterless read with no output schema and annotations covering safety needs little, but the description omits pagination/result volume and never clarifies the organization scoping it mentions. Adequate, not complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, which would normally be a baseline 4, but the phrase "for given organization" implies an organization input that does not exist in the schema. That mismatch can make an agent search for a parameter that isn't there, so it is scored below baseline.

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 ("Retrieves provisioning endpoints") and pins the scope to an organization, plus the underlying GET path. It is clear what the tool returns, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling abx_get_provisioning_endpoints_by_id beyond the word "all" in the name.

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?

No indication of when to call this versus abx_get_provisioning_endpoints_by_id, or what preconditions apply. The agent must infer that this is the unfiltered list variant from the name alone.

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