List organisations

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

The description indicates a read-only list operation, which is minimally transparent. No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden but does not mention pagination, ordering, or authorization. The behavior is not misleading.

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 unnecessary words. It is efficiently structured.

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 list tool, the description provides basic context but lacks details on return format, pagination, or ordering. Without an output schema, some information is missing, but the core purpose is clear.

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 0% and the description does not explain the 'projectId' parameter beyond its name. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, adding no meaning to the parameter.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'synthetic organisations in a project', distinguishing it from siblings like get_org (single), build_org (create), delete_org, and query_org (search).

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 guidance on when to use versus alternatives such as query_org or list_projects. The description implies use for listing all synthetic organisations but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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