rybbit_list_sitesList all sites and organizations the authenticated user can access, allowing selection of an analytics site for further data queries.
List all sites and organizations the authenticated user has access to
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | Organizations with nested sites |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.8.1Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Organizations with nested sites",
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "number"
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "sites": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "domain": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "number"
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "organizationId": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "number"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "name"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "data"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.5.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructiveHint and a closed world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine piece of context the annotations do not: results are constrained to what the authenticated user can access. It says nothing about ordering, aggregation across organizations, or pagination.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope constraint is embedded rather than buried after preamble. Every clause 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 an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the annotations cover the safety profile, leaving little for the description to carry. The one remaining gap is the shape of the results (flat list vs. organizations nesting sites), which the agent would have to infer.
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 there is no parameter semantics to document and the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. Nothing in the description misleads about inputs.
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?
States a clear verb ('List') and resources ('sites and organizations') scoped to the authenticated user, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly contrast itself with nearby siblings such as rybbit_list_users or rybbit_get_site_id, which keeps it short of a 5.
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 statement of when to reach for this tool versus the many alternatives (rybbit_get_site_id, rybbit_create_site, rybbit_list_users), nor of any prerequisites. The usage is only implied by the name and the word 'List'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.