zeasm_list_organizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms read-only behavior and adds JMESPath filtering support. However, no details on pagination, error handling, or performance are disclosed. The description adds moderate value beyond annotations.

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: first states purpose and read-only nature, second explains JMESPath filtering. No extraneous words, front-loaded with key information.

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 that output schema exists (so return values are explained separately), the description covers the essential purpose and filtering capability. It could mention pagination or ordering, but for a straightforward list tool, it is reasonably complete.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters documented. The description adds that the query parameter supports JMESPath client-side filtering, which is helpful but does not significantly enhance the schema descriptions. The service parameter is not elaborated.

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 clearly states 'List all EASM organizations configured for the tenant', specifying verb, resource, and scope. The 'read-only' qualifier and JMESPath mention add clarity. Sibling tools have different resource types (e.g., findings, domains), so this stands out.

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 listing organizations and mentions JMESPath filtering, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., zeasm_list_findings). No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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