Get IT Glue Organization

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by detailing the return content ('detailed information including name, type, status, quick notes, alerts, and links') and the IT Glue URL, which helps the agent understand the output structure and available data.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by return details and parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, and the formatting with clear sections (Args, Returns) enhances readability efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (simple retrieval), rich annotations (covering read-only, non-destructive, open-world, idempotent), and 100% schema coverage, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, and parameter usage, making it sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly without needing an output schema.

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 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters (e.g., 'id' as 'The unique ID of the resource' and 'response_format' with enum values). The description adds minimal semantics beyond the schema, only restating that 'id' is required and listing the enum options without new insights, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 a single organization by ID') and resource ('organization'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'itglue_list_organizations' (which lists multiple) and 'itglue_create_organization' (which creates new ones). The verb 'Get' precisely indicates retrieval rather than modification.

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 context by specifying 'by ID' and listing sibling tools like 'itglue_list_organizations', suggesting this tool is for retrieving a specific known organization rather than browsing. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use alternatives (e.g., 'itglue_list_organizations' for unknown IDs) or prerequisites like authentication.

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