list_organizations_for_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without revealing side effects, permission requirements, pagination, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant gap for a tool that may have hidden implications.

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, tightly worded sentence with no fluff or redundant information. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it extremely concise and front-loaded.

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?

Although the tool is simple and an output schema exists (covering return values), the description fails to provide enough context to distinguish it from the closely named sibling list_user_organizations. It also omits any nuances about 'accessible' or potential pagination, leaving the agent under-informed for correct invocation.

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 schema provides no description for user_id, and the description adds the meaning that this ID identifies the user whose accessible organizations are listed. While minimal, it clarifies the parameter's purpose, which is helpful given the 0% schema coverage.

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 a specific verb (List) and resource (organizations) with a scope (accessible by a specific user ID). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool list_user_organizations, which likely performs a similar function. This prevents a score of 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_user_organizations or get_user_by_id. The description offers no context on selection criteria, leaving the agent to guess which tool fits the intent.

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