iiko: организации

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the endpoint and mentions the return value (organizationId), but does not explicitly state side effects, authentication requirements, or response format. The 'list' action implies read-only, but this is not made explicit.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence that front-loads the primary purpose ('List of organizations') and then adds the key return-value context. Every part is essential and there is no wasted text.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what it does and why the return value matters. A minor gap is the lack of explicit detail about the full response structure, but the provided information is sufficient for its intended use.

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 100% since the only parameter (apiLogin) is fully described in the schema. The tool description does not mention apiLogin or add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high 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 'List of organizations' and specifies the endpoint 'POST /api/1/organizations', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on the organization entity and notes its role in providing organizationId for other calls.

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 phrase 'Возвращает organizationId для остальных вызовов' indicates that this tool is a prerequisite for other calls by providing the organizationId. This gives clear contextual guidance on when to use it, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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