mcp-itglue

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get IT Glue Organization

itglue_get_organization

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single IT Glue organization by its ID, returning details as human-readable Markdown or structured JSON for documentation and lookup tasks.

Instructions

Get a single IT Glue organization by ID.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "organization_id": "<organization_id>"
    },
    "name": "itglue_get_organization"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`organization_id`	Yes	The organization ID
`response_format`	No	Output format: human-readable markdown (default) or structured JSON	markdown

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`item`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.6.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, making the tool's safe, read-only behavior clear. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., error handling, rate limits), but it is consistent and not contradictory.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no waste. However, it omits potential useful details like output content, making it slightly under-informative for its brevity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, it does not mention the available output format options or provide any distinction from sibling tools beyond the basic purpose. Adequate for a simple get-by-id tool but lacks enrichment.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters already described. The description mentions 'by ID' relating to organization_id but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's existing description for that parameter. It does not address response_format.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states 'Get a single IT Glue organization by ID,' clearly specifying the verb ('Get'), resource ('IT Glue organization'), and mechanism ('by ID'). This implicitly distinguishes it from siblings like 'itglue_list_organizations' which retrieves multiple organizations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use itglue_list_organizations instead). There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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