analytics_orgs_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the access scope: only orgs the API key owner is a member of. It also documents the returned fields and how the ID is used elsewhere. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior or describe edge cases such as empty results.

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 three compact sentences with no wasted wording. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by practical guidance for using the returned org ID.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description provides enough: it states the access scope, returned fields, and how to use the returned _id. No additional parameter or output documentation is required for an agent to call it correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline is already strong. The description does not need to clarify parameter semantics, and it appropriately focuses on output fields and ID usage instead.

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 uses a clear verb+resource formulation: 'List analytics orgs the API key owner is a member of', and it names the returned fields (_id, org_name). It does not explicitly contrast this tool with sibling analytics list tools such as analytics_projects_list, so it falls short of the highest clarity tier.

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?

It explains the key downstream usage: use the returned org _id as org_id in other analytics tools or set MCP_ANALYTICS_ORG_ID. It does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over alternatives or discuss exclusions, but the usage context is clear.

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