Skip to main content
Glama

clerk.get_organization_role

Retrieve an organization role by id from a connected Clerk application.

Call clerk.get_connected_accounts first. Pass clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection, or omit it to use the default account.

Returns the role summary including assigned permissions.

Cost = 3 tokens.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
role_idYesClerk organization role id to retrieve, update, or delete.
clerk_instance_idNoClerk instance id (ins_...) from clerk.get_connected_accounts. Omit to use the default connected account.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organization_roleNoOrganization role summary.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / role_id / description
      Previous value: -"Clerk organization role id to retrieve, update, delete, or assign permissions to."New value: +"Clerk organization role id to retrieve, update, or delete."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly marks this as a read operation, discloses the return summary, and notes the token cost. It doesn't cover error cases or auth requirements, but for a simple getter this is adequate.

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 four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence is relevant: the prerequisite, instance selection, return summary, and cost. No fluff.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The tool is simple with two parameters and an output schema. The description covers all essential context: the prerequisite, connection targeting, return value, and cost, making it sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description only paraphrases the schema's existing parameter details (e.g., 'omit to use default'). No additional meaning is added beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with 'Retrieve an organization role by id,' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly states the action, the target, and the return value ('role summary including assigned permissions'), distinguishing it from listing or mutation tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly instructs to call clerk.get_connected_accounts first and explains how to choose an instance or use the default. While it doesn't compare against list_organization_roles, the prerequisite and connection-targeting guidance are clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose, further clarified by group prefixes and clear descriptions. Within each group, tools perform different operations (e.g., domains.lookup vs. domains.whois vs. domains.rdap) with no ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent group.tool_name pattern using snake_case. The naming is predictable and uniformly applied across all groups.

Tool Count4/5

78 tools is high, but the server aggregates multiple distinct API domains (11 groups). Each group has a reasonable number of tools, typically under 10, with TikTok having 17. The count reflects breadth, not bloat.

Completeness5/5

Each domain's tool set covers the primary expected operations (e.g., search, details, reviews, metrics, user info). There are no obvious gaps for read-only analytical use; features like posting are likely out of scope.