Create a new organization on TaskHub by providing a name and optional description. Set up a dedicated workspace to manage projects and tasks.
Create a new organization.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Organization name | |
| description | No | Organization description |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the mutation without mentioning permissions, side effects, duplicate-name behavior, or what the response will contain. 'Create' implies a write operation, but no meaningful behavioral context is added.
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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for a simple creation tool whose parameters are already documented in the schema.
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?
The tool is low-complexity with fully documented parameters, and the description gives the core purpose. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits return behavior, side effects, and prerequisites, which are meaningful gaps for a mutating operation. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.
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 documents both parameters at 100% coverage ('Organization name' and 'Organization description'), so the description adds no parameter-level meaning. This meets the baseline for a fully schema-covered simple input set.
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 states a clear action ('Create') and a clear resource ('organization'), which is easily distinguishable from sibling tools that list, invite, or manage orgs. It lacks additional context about what creating an organization entails, but the purpose is unambiguous.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as taskhub_orgs_list or taskhub_org_invite. The description does not mention prerequisites, sequencing, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.