Listar tenants (árbol del tenant activo)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds context about the X-Tenant dependency, which is useful, but does not explicitly state read-only nature or any permissions/limitations. The 'list' verb implies a safe operation, but the description could be more 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?

Two sentences, both purposeful. The main action is stated first, followed by a critical disambiguation from a sibling. No fluff.

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 listing tool, the description fully covers the key context (active tenant) and the critical distinction from a similarly named tool. It is complete for an agent to invoke correctly without further details.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description has nothing to add. Baseline for 0 params is 4; no further explanation needed.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('árbol completo de tenants/scopes') and clarifies it applies to the active tenant of the session. It explicitly differentiates from sibling list_available_tenants, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly warns against confusing this with list_available_tenants and explains the difference: this lists the active tenant's tree, while the alternative lists tenants the token can access. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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