get_organization

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and it discloses nothing. It does not confirm this is a read-only operation, mention permission/auth requirements, or indicate what happens when the org_id is unknown (error vs empty).

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?

Three words, front-loaded, with zero filler or repetition. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification rather than true economy.

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 trivial single-parameter getter the description is minimally adequate, but with no output schema and no indication of what "details" comprises, the agent cannot anticipate the response shape. A short clause on returned fields or error behavior would close the gap.

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?

There is exactly one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents org_id. The description adds no format hints (e.g., UUID vs numeric ID) or constraints beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 has a verb ("Get") and a resource ("organization details"), which is better than a tautology, but "details" is vague about what is actually returned. It also does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling list_organizations, so an agent must infer that this one takes a single org_id and returns one record.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus list_organizations, nor any prerequisite or context. The agent must infer from the required org_id alone that this fetches a single organization rather than enumerating them.

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