set_active_org

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool changes session state and affects subsequent tools, which is the key behavioral trait. It does not mention potential errors or persistence, but for a simple setter this is adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and then necessary context. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and usage, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers the purpose, usage condition, and effect. It does not explain return values or error handling, but for a session setter those are not critical for selection or invocation.

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 already describes the parameter as 'Organization name or id' (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the parameter: it sets the default for the session and influences subsequent tools. This goes beyond the schema's basic type/description.

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: 'Set the default organization for this session by name or id.' It specifies the resource (default organization), the method (by name or id), and the effect (subsequent tools target the chosen org), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_organizations or other operations.

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?

It provides a clear condition for use: 'Useful when the token can access several organizations.' This explains when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it misses the full 'when/when-not' guidance that would earn a 5.

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