set_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. It discloses only that the organization can be specified by ID or name. It does not mention side effects (e.g., changing subsequent operation contexts), idempotency, validation, or return value behavior, which are needed for a setting tool.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and completes with parameter clarification. Every sentence earns its place.

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 parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential action and parameter. It could be slightly more complete by noting that the organization must exist or that setting it changes the active context, but given low complexity and output schema availability, it is mostly adequate.

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% (parameter 'org' described as 'Organization ID or name'). The description repeats this information without adding extra meaning, so it meets the baseline but adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'Select an organization as the active organization.' The verb 'select' combined with the resource 'organization' sets a specific action. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_organizations' (listing) and 'get_current_organization' (retrieving current, not setting).

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 context (set active org by ID or name) but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

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