list_organization_venues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It states it lists all venues, implying a read operation, but does not disclose pagination behavior (the 'continuation' parameter indicates pagination) or return format. The description is minimal but 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, clear sentence with no filler, making it efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, but it lacks information on pagination behavior, which is relevant given the 'continuation' parameter. The tool is a simple list operation, so moderate completeness is acceptable.

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%, but the description implies organization_id is the scope for the listing. It does not explain the 'continuation' parameter, leaving it undocumented. However, the description adds some context about the primary parameter's purpose beyond the schema field name.

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 it lists all venues under an organization, distinguishing it from single-venue operations like 'get_venue' or 'create_venue'. It is specific about the resource and scope, though it does not name sibling tools explicitly.

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 implies usage for retrieving a list of venues, which is distinct from venue-specific operations. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, such as when to use get_venue instead.

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