get_role_guidanceGet public positioning guidance for one technical-GTM role: what it is, what the hiring manager screens for, and how to think about fit.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| role | Yes | Role slug: solutions-architect | customer-success | sales-engineer | technical-account-manager | support-engineer | forward-deployed-engineer |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Public' usefully signals no authentication/private context, and the colon list describes the returned content, but side effects, response format, and access limitations are not addressed.
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?
One compact sentence leads with the verb and object, then uses a colon to enumerate the guidance's contents. Every phrase earns its place and there is no padding.
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 one-parameter lookup with full schema coverage, the description provides enough context to invoke the tool correctly: what it returns and what the role parameter represents. It does not link to sibling tools or describe the output format, but those are secondary for this straightforward guidance endpoint.
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 100% and the single 'role' parameter is already documented with its allowed values. The description's 'one technical-GTM role' adds no new meaning beyond what the input schema provides, so it stays at the baseline.
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 verb ('Get'), a resource ('public positioning guidance for one technical-GTM role'), and the exact contents ('what it is, what the hiring manager screens for, and how to think about fit'). It clearly distinguishes this from listing roles or explaining how the process works.
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 phrase 'for one technical-GTM role' implies this is a single-role lookup rather than a general overview, but the description does not explicitly mention when to prefer it over list_roles or how_it_works and gives no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The tools are mostly distinct: one lists all roles, one gives detailed guidance for a single role, and one explains the service itself. There is minor overlap in that list_roles also summarizes what each role is and what hiring managers screen for, but the descriptions clarify that get_role_guidance is deeper and role-specific.
Two tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (get_role_guidance, list_roles), while how_it_works is a phrase rather than a verb_object convention. However, all names are lowercase snake_case and readable, so the set is mostly consistent with one minor deviation.
Three tools is well-scoped for a niche service focused on role guidance and product explanation. Each tool serves a clear purpose with no redundancy, and the count feels neither thin nor bloated.
The surface covers list roles, get detailed role guidance, and explain how the product works, which forms a coherent user journey. The only minor gap is that there is no in-server tool to run a full analysis, but the how_it_works description acknowledges that external flow rather than requiring this server to include it.