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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds non-obvious context that closed roles are still retrievable and advises reading the status field, which is valuable. However, it does not mention error cases, response shape beyond the output schema, or permissions – gaps that a simple read tool could reasonably disclose.

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 two sentences with no filler: it front-loads the primary action, lists what is included, and adds the closed-roles nuance efficiently. Every clause contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 low-complexity get-by-id tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential facts: what is returned, that closed roles are included, and that status should be read. It could explicitly state that this is for when an ID is already known, but the siblings and the title make that sufficiently inferable.

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?

The schema describes role_id only as a string with title 'Role Id' and 0% description coverage, so the description's 'by id' clarifies that this parameter is the role identifier. That is minimal added meaning; no format, example, or further semantics are provided, but the single parameter makes the intent reasonably clear.

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 retrieves a single role by id and enumerates the returned content (full description, skills, pay, hiring company). It distinguishes itself from the search_*/get_* siblings by its singular, id-based focus.

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 provides clear context: it returns one role by id and works for closed roles too, signaling when this direct lookup is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives like search_jobs for discovery, but the contrast is implicit and the closed-role note is a meaningful usage condition.

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