list_tenants

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by explaining the default-instance convention, the meaning of the 'plugins' and 'production' fields, and downstream refusal behavior. It could mention failure/authentication behavior, but for a zero-parameter listing tool the disclosed behavior is substantially transparent.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds meaningful guidance. It avoids restating the tool name or schema and uses short paragraphs to separate purpose, usage, and field semantics.

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 zero parameters, an existing output schema, and sibling tools that depend on this tool's return value, the description fully covers what an agent needs: why to call it first, how company_id maps to other tools, and the meaning of returned fields that affect downstream behavior.

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 no parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so parameter semantics are essentially moot. The description adds useful semantic context for the returned company_id field, especially the empty-company_id-means-default convention, which goes beyond the empty schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the SuccessFactors instances this server can reach.' This clearly distinguishes list_tenants from the sibling query/metadata tools, since its purpose is to enumerate reachable tenants rather than run queries against them.

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?

It explicitly says 'Call this first' and explains why: the returned company_id values are required by the other tools. It also names odata_query and ce_query and states that they refuse tenants with null production or config_error, giving concrete when-to-use and prerequisite context.

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