Ror

Get

get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Full ROR record. Accepts the trailing identifier (e.g. "03vek6s52") or the full URL.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ror_id": "03vek6s52"
    },
    "name": "get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ror_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	ROR organization ID (URL)
`name`	No	Organization name
`links`	No	External links
`types`	No	Organization types
`aliases`	No	Alternative names
`country`	No
`acronyms`	No	Organization acronyms
`addresses`	No	Organization addresses
`established`	No	Year the organization was established
`ip_addresses`	No	Associated IP address ranges
`email_address`	No	Organization email address if available
`relationships`	No	Related organizations

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 24, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "ror_id": "03vek6s52"
+  },
+  {
+    "ror_id": "https://ror.org/03vek6s52"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Full ROR organization record",
+  "properties": {
+    "acronyms": {
+      "description": "Organization acronyms",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "addresses": {
+      "description": "Organization addresses",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "aliases": {
+      "description": "Alternative names",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "country": {
+      "properties": {
+        "country_code": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "country_name": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "email_address": {
+      "description": "Organization email address if available",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "established": {
+      "description": "Year the organization was established",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "ROR organization ID (URL)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ip_addresses": {
+      "description": "Associated IP address ranges",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "links": {
+      "description": "External links",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Organization name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "relationships": {
+      "description": "Related organizations",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "types": {
+      "description": "Organization types",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., caching, errors), but for a simple get operation, the annotations are sufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with no unnecessary words. The description is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter, read-only tool with output schema, the description is sufficient. It lacks usage guidance, but otherwise covers the essential semantics.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description explains that ror_id can be either the trailing identifier or the full URL, adding crucial format information not present in the bare string schema. This fully clarifies the one parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description says 'Full ROR record,' which implies retrieval of a ROR record by identifier. It is clear in verb+resource but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like resolve_entity or entity_profile.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage via identifier or URL, but does not state when this is the right choice compared to search or other lookup tools.

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

All Ror tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Get