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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that the payload includes application instructions, which is useful context, but says nothing about error behavior for an unknown slug or how large the returned description is.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed immediately by the parameter source. No filler, though the phrasing 'Full description of one role' is slightly compressed compared to a clean verb-plus-resource statement.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description plus schema give an agent enough to call it correctly. The main omission is failure behavior for an invalid or stale slug.

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 coverage is 0% — the slug field has no description at all — so the description must carry the meaning, and it does by identifying slug as a role identifier obtained from list_open_roles. It stops short of giving format details such as casing or hyphenation, which leaves a small gap.

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 names a specific resource ('one role') and scope ('Full description ... and how to apply'), which distinguishes it from the sibling list_open_roles that returns many. It does not state an explicit verb like 'retrieve', but the intent is unambiguous.

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?

It gives clear routing guidance: 'Use a slug from list_open_roles,' telling the agent to call the list tool first and where the identifier comes from. There is no explicit when-not guidance, but a single-role lookup has few plausible alternatives here.

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