get_organization

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden, but it only says it fetches by ID. It does not disclose permissions required, whether missing IDs raise or return null, or any behavioral traits beyond the obvious read.

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?

Very brief and front-loaded with the core statement. The 'Args:' block is slightly redundant given the schema, but overall it's tight and readable.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained. However, without annotations or usage context, the description is minimally adequate for a simple lookup tool but leaves gaps around error behavior and permissions.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and there is one parameter. The description identifies organization_id as 'The organization (product type) ID', which adds a clarification beyond the bare schema, but doesn't explain format or constraints. Baseline for a 1-param tool with no schema descriptions is around 3.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (organization) with scope 'single' and 'by ID'. Clear enough to distinguish from list_organizations and create/update/delete siblings, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like list_organizations for enumeration, no prerequisites. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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