Get an organization

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the concrete behavioral detail that exactly one organization is returned and that the lookup key is a numeric ID, which is modest context beyond the annotations, though it omits error behavior or not-found handling.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the essential behavior and key distinguishing detail (numeric ID) in minimal words.

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?

This is a simple read-only, single-ID lookup with one parameter, a fully documented input schema, complete annotations, and an output schema. The one-sentence description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly; no important context is missing.

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%, and the org_id parameter is already documented with type, range, and provenance ('as returned by list_organizations or lookup_organization'). The description merely restates the parameter's role without adding further semantic meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 specific verb ('Returns'), resource ('organization'), and retrieval method ('by its numeric id'). This clarity differentiates the tool from sibling lookup_organization, which likely uses a name or slug, and from list_organizations, which returns multiple records.

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 'by its numeric id' phrasing implicitly signals that this tool is appropriate when an organization ID is already available, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use or alternative-routing guidance. It does not mention preferring lookup_organization for non-ID lookups or list_organizations for enumeration, leaving the agent to infer the intended context.

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