get_organization

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, requires no special permissions, or what constitutes a valid organization ID. The description is minimal and does not disclose potential errors or limits.

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 very concise at two sentences, with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main action. However, it could be slightly expanded to include more context without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description is adequate but not rich. It does not explain what details are returned or that the ID is required (though schema indicates required). The output schema likely covers return values, so the description is minimally 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?

The only parameter, organization_id, is described simply as 'The numeric organization ID.' The schema type is string, but the description says numeric, which is slightly misleading. No additional constraints, format, or examples are provided. With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds little meaning beyond the parameter name.

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 'Get details of a specific organization by its ID,' specifying the verb ('Get'), resource ('organization'), and identifier method. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_organizations, create_organization, and delete_organization.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not explain that this tool should be used when an organization ID is known, while list_organizations is for browsing. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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