passgage_get_organization_unit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Get a specific organization_unit by ID,' which restates the tool's name and offers no details about error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), response format, or authorization requirements. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious read intent.

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 that efficiently communicates the resource and qualifier. There is no redundant wording, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 tool, the description plus schema covers the essential input. However, without an output schema, the description does not mention that the return value is the organization_unit object or any error conditions, which would make it more complete. It's adequate but leaves gaps.

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 fully describes the single 'id' parameter, including its type and purpose ('The UUID of the organization_unit to retrieve'). The description's 'by ID' merely echoes the schema, so it adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the baseline.

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') and the resource ('a specific organization_unit'), with a qualifier ('by ID') that distinguishes it from list, create, update, and delete siblings. It precisely conveys the tool's scope and differentiates it from similar CRUD tools.

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 a clear use case: retrieving a single organization unit when its ID is known. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like list_organization_units, but the 'by ID' qualifier clarifies that this is for one specific record, providing clear context without exclusions.

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