jira_get_project_role_members

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any authentication or permission requirements, rate limits, or behavior when no members are found. This is insufficient for a safe and informed tool invocation.

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 a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 retrieval tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete but lacks behavioral details (e.g., read-only, error conditions). It compensates by noting where roleId comes from. Could benefit from mentioning the expected output format.

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% with both parameters described. The description adds useful context for roleId by linking it to jira_get_project_roles, but does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns members assigned to a specific role in a project, using specific verbs ('restituisce') and resources ('membri', 'ruolo', 'progetto'). It distinguishes well from siblings like jira_get_project_roles (which returns roles) and jira_get_projects (returns projects).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. The description implies usage with a project key and role ID but does not provide context for when to choose this over other tools like jira_get_project_roles or jira_search.

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