get_organization

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details' which implies a read operation, but it does not explain permissions needed, what 'details' includes, error behavior, or response format. This is a minimal statement with no behavioral context.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally viable. It tells what the tool does but not what fields/details are returned or any special constraints. Given the simplicity, a bit more specificity (e.g., 'basic details' or 'full organization object') would improve completeness, but it is not severely lacking.

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 description 'ID of the resource' is generic, and the tool description clarifies that the ID refers specifically to an organization. This adds meaning beyond the schema, which has 100% coverage. The description tells the agent that the expected input is the organization's ID, which is useful.

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), the resource (organization), and the scope (details by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like list_my_organizations and find_organization by explicitly indicating a direct ID-based lookup.

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 you have an organization ID and want its details, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. No exclusions or comparisons to siblings are provided, so guidance is only implicit.

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