iaas_get_integrations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the organizational scope constraint, but says nothing about pagination defaults, result ordering, or the shape of the returned collection.

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?

It is short, but the first line merely restates the tool name and the third line is a raw REST path that mostly duplicates the annotation title. Only the middle sentence (org scope) earns its place.

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 six parameters, no output schema, and a paginated collection endpoint, the description should at least characterize what comes back (a list of integration records with paging metadata). It leaves that entirely to inference, which is a meaningful gap for an agent deciding how to consume the response.

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%, so top, skip, count, filter, select and apiVersion are all documented in the schema itself. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning such as default page size or filter expression examples, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Get all integrations") and narrows the scope to "within the current organization." The plural "all integrations" implicitly distinguishes it from the singular sibling iaas_get_integration, but that differentiation is left to inference rather than stated.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this list endpoint versus iaas_get_integration for a single record, nor any mention of prerequisites or when to filter instead of paging through everything. The only context is the implicit org scoping sentence.

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