list_my_organizations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates the operation is a read-only enumeration (via 'List') and clarifies the scope ('every organization' and 'across orgs'). It does not describe return format or authentication, but for a simple list operation, the behavior is sufficiently disclosed.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately follow with a practical use case. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides all necessary context: what it does, who it acts on, and why to use it. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like whoami and get_organization without needing extra detail.

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 has zero parameters, which sets a baseline of 4. The description adds meaningful context by stating 'across orgs', explicitly implying that no org filter parameter exists and the operation covers all organizations. This goes beyond the empty schema.

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 action ('List every organization the current user belongs to') and adds the scope 'across orgs', which distinguishes it from org-specific tools like get_organization. The mention of multi-tenant agents further clarifies its intended use.

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 gives a clear use case ('useful for multi-tenant agents picking which org to operate in'), but does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it. The 'across orgs' phrasing hints at differentiation from scoped tools, but falls short of full exclusion guidance.

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