Skip to main content
Glama

generate_organization_schema

Create JSON-LD schema markup for organizations to enhance SEO and structured data visibility. Input organization details like name, URL, and description to generate compliant schema code.

Instructions

Generate an Organization JSON-LD schema for companies, non-profits, or other organizations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesOrganization name
urlNoOfficial website URL
logoNoLogo image URL
descriptionNoBrief description of the organization
foundingDateNoFounding date (YYYY-MM-DD)
founderNoFounder name
sameAsNoArray of social profile URLs

Implementation Reference

  • Tool registration and handler for 'generate_organization_schema'.
    server.tool(
      "generate_organization_schema",
      "Generate an Organization JSON-LD schema for companies, non-profits, or other organizations.",
      {
        name: z.string().describe("Organization name"),
        url: z.string().optional().describe("Official website URL"),
        logo: z.string().optional().describe("Logo image URL"),
        description: z
          .string()
          .optional()
          .describe("Brief description of the organization"),
        foundingDate: z
          .string()
          .optional()
          .describe("Founding date (YYYY-MM-DD)"),
        founder: z.string().optional().describe("Founder name"),
        sameAs: z
          .array(z.string())
          .optional()
          .describe("Array of social profile URLs"),
      },
      async (params) => {
        const schema = buildOrganizationSchema(params);
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text" as const,
              text: JSON.stringify(schema, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    );
  • Helper function that constructs the organization JSON-LD structure.
    function buildOrganizationSchema(params: {
      name: string;
      url?: string;
      logo?: string;
      description?: string;
      foundingDate?: string;
      founder?: string;
      sameAs?: string[];
    }): object {
      const fields: Record<string, unknown> = { name: params.name };
      if (params.url) fields.url = params.url;
      if (params.logo) fields.logo = params.logo;
      if (params.description) fields.description = params.description;
      if (params.foundingDate) fields.foundingDate = params.foundingDate;
      if (params.founder) {
        fields.founder = {
          "@type": "Person",
          name: params.founder,
        };
      }
      if (params.sameAs) fields.sameAs = params.sameAs;
      return buildJsonLd("Organization", fields);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'Generate[s]' something, implying a creation or output operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it's idempotent, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format looks like (beyond 'JSON-LD schema'). For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence: 'Generate an Organization JSON-LD schema for companies, non-profits, or other organizations.' It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no wasted words or redundant information. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying the tool's function and scope.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (a 7-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., output format, error handling), usage context, and how it differs from siblings. While the schema covers parameters, the description doesn't add enough value to guide an agent effectively in selection and invocation, especially for a tool that generates structured data without output schema documentation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond implying they relate to organizations (e.g., 'name', 'url', 'logo'). Since the schema already provides full coverage, the baseline score is 3, as the description doesn't compensate with extra context like examples or usage notes for the parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Generate an Organization JSON-LD schema for companies, non-profits, or other organizations.' It specifies the verb ('Generate'), resource ('Organization JSON-LD schema'), and scope ('companies, non-profits, or other organizations'), which is specific and actionable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_schema' or 'generate_person_schema', leaving some ambiguity about when to choose this over alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the target ('companies, non-profits, or other organizations'), but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. For example, it doesn't clarify if this is for SEO, data structuring, or other use cases, nor does it compare with siblings like 'generate_schema' or 'list_schema_types', leaving the agent to guess based on context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sharozdawa/schema-gen'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server