Retrieve the list of departments in an organization, optionally filtered by a parent department ID, to view the organizational hierarchy.
Get the list of departments in an organization
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| parentId | No | Parent department ID | |
| organizationId | Yes | Organization ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.60Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates 'Get', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose whether the list is flat, hierarchical, paginated, or whether it includes all departments or only those under a parent. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond the action.
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 a single sentence that directly states the purpose without any fluff or repetition. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it is also minimal in content.
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 simple list tool, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the behavior of the optional parentId parameter or whether the result is scoped to a single department or includes sub-departments. Given the existence of related sibling tools and the absence of an output schema, more detail is needed to fully understand the tool's functionality.
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?
Both parameters (organizationId and parentId) have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning about how parentId affects the list (e.g., filtering by parent). Since the schema already documents the parameters, a baseline of 3 is 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 clearly states 'Get the list of departments in an organization', specifying the verb 'Get' and the resource 'list of departments'. It differentiates from sibling tools like get_organization_department_info (singular department info) and get_organization_department_ancestors (ancestors). However, it does not explicitly state that this lists direct children vs. all descendants, which could confuse with those siblings.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_organization_department_info, get_organization_department_ancestors, or list_organization_members. The description only states what it does, not how to choose it based on the use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.