list_organizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds that it includes dataset counts and allows portal filtering, but does not disclose further behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, rate limits). It does not contradict annotations.

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 sentences plus an Args section, very concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. Minimal waste, though the Args section could be integrated into the paragraph for even tighter structure.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. Both parameters are documented, the tool's purpose and scope are clear, and annotations cover safety. Complete for a simple list tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. The Args section provides clear meaning: 'Include dataset counts per organization' for include_counts and 'Narrow to one portal. Default: all portals' for portal, adding value beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 'List government ministries and organizations with dataset counts across all portals,' specifying the verb 'list', the resource 'organizations', and the scope 'across all portals'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_portals or list_topics.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_portals or search_datasets. The description only implies usage by listing parameters, but lacks when-to-use or when-not-to-use directives.

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