orgunits_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' clearly implies a read operation and harmless retrieval, but it does not mention behavior for non-existent paths, authorization requirements, or return format. It is adequate for a straightforward get but lacks detail.

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 one clear sentence with an example, containing no fluff or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

The tool is simple with a single parameter and no output schema, so the description covers the core purpose. However, it omits return value details and error cases, which are relevant for a complete understanding. Given the simplicity, the missing information is not critical but noticeable.

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 schema provides no description for orgUnitPath (0% coverage), so the description compensates by showing an example path '/Sales'. This adds meaningful context about the expected format, though it does not fully specify path rules (e.g., root path representation).

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 the specific action ('Get') and resource ('org unit') with the method of identification ('by path'). The example '/Sales' distinguishes it from list-type siblings like orgunits_list.

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 when a specific org unit is needed by path, and the example gives a concrete reference. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like orgunits_list or state when this tool should be preferred over others.

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