get_organization

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

The description does not mention behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. Since there are no annotations to fall back on, the description carries the full burden but only lists returned fields.

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, well-formed sentence with 18 words, conveying all necessary information without redundancy or waste.

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 simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers the return fields (contact info, tags, policy assignments). It is nearly complete, though it could optionally mention that no pagination or nested objects are expected.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear description for organization_id. The description adds minimal additional meaning beyond 'by its ID', which is already implied by the schema.

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 action ('Get detailed information'), the resource ('a specific organization'), and the key fields returned ('contact info, tags, and policy assignments'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_organizations and get_organization_locations.

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 needing detailed info on a single organization, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_organizations or get_organization_locations), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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