balena_list_organizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds the useful context that results are limited to organizations visible to the API token, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or response shape beyond the schema.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, resource, and scope immediately, making it easy for an agent 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 read-only list operation, the description plus annotations and schema are largely sufficient: the agent knows it is safe, idempotent, and returns organizations visible to the token. Minor gaps remain around how top/skip affect results and whether parent_id filters nested scopes, but these are partially inferable from the schema.

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 only 33% (only parent_id has a description), and the tool description does not explain top, skip, or parent_id. The parameter names and constraints suggest pagination and filtering, but the description adds no semantic meaning beyond what the sparse schema provides.

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 ('List') and resource ('organizations') and adds a clear scope ('visible to the API token'). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like balena_list_fleets and balena_list_teams, and the auth-scope phrase clarifies what subset is returned.

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 intended use: fetch organizations accessible to the current API token. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, leaving the choice between list_organizations and related list tools to inference.

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