get_role_context

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond that by naming the concrete external sources (BERUFENET/O*NET, ESCO, Entgeltatlas, BA open positions) and noting that the result is an aggregate; it does not discuss latency, fallback, or missing-data behavior.

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?

A single dense sentence with no filler; it front-loads the core purpose and then lists the included data domains. Nothing is repeated unnecessarily.

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?

Because an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers the aggregate nature and data sources, though it omits mention of the sprache parameter and does not clarify signal behavior beyond the schema parameter name.

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 description coverage is 75%: rolle, ort, and mit_signalen are documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter-level meaning, and the sprache parameter remains undocumented in both schema and description. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema carries most parameter semantics.

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 identifies the resource: a consolidated role context returned in one call, enumerating mapping/classification, tasks, skills, salary, and labor-market signal. This distinguishes it from granular siblings such as get_tasks, get_skills, and get_salary, though it relies on the title for an explicit verb.

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 'in einem Aufruf' implies the tool should be used when the agent wants several role-related data points together instead of calling multiple granular tools. However, no alternatives are named explicitly and no when-not-to-use conditions are given.

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