Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
apollo-io-mcp

apollo-io-mcp

by thevgergroup
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Complete Organization Info

apollo_get_complete_organization_info

Fetch full organization information by ID to enrich B2B records and uncover company insights for targeted outreach.

Instructions

Get complete information for a specific organization by organization ID.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "organization_id": "<organization_id>"
    },
    "name": "apollo_get_complete_organization_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organization_idYesThe Apollo organization ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.2.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool 'gets' information, implying a read operation, but fails to mention any side effects, data freshness, authentication requirements, or error conditions. Minimal behavioral context is added beyond the tool's name.

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 concise sentence of 9 words that directly states the action and input. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, with zero wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter, the description is adequate but lacks detail on what 'complete information' includes, especially compared to sibling enrichment tools. It does not clarify scope or limitations, so completeness is moderate.

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 has 100% coverage with a description for the only parameter (organization_id). The tool description adds no additional semantic detail; it merely restates the parameter purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameter adequately.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'complete information for a specific organization', and explicitly mentions the input (organization ID). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like apollo_enrich_company which are for enrichment, not full info retrieval.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apollo_enrich_company or apollo_search_companies. There is no mention of use cases or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools