List Organizations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does add real value: it discloses the return shape (names, roles, plans, avatar URLs) and a genuine auth pitfall (needs a user credential, database API keys cannot list organizations). It omits pagination or rate-limit behavior, so it's not exhaustive.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, then returns, auth, and usage are cleanly delineated with bold headers and bullets. Each section adds needed information and nothing is redundant.

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 parameterless read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies everything required: what comes back, how to authenticate, and when to reach for it. Nothing essential is missing.

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 nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline for a no-parameter schema is 4.

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 specific verb (List) and resource (RawTree organizations) scoped to 'available to the authenticated user,' so an agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly contrast itself with neighbors like list-organization-members, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

A dedicated 'When to use' block gives two concrete triggers (need an org name before listing clusters; working across multiple orgs in one connection). It stops short of naming an alternative tool or an explicit when-not, so it's clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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