get_role_obligations

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

No annotations provided, but the description explains the return content (obligations from GDPR articles with optional Azure guidance) and parameter effects, sufficient for a read-only tool.

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 concise with a clear header and structured Args section, no redundant sentences.

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?

With an output schema present, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameters, needing no further behavioral details.

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%, but the docstring enumerates allowed values for 'role' and explains 'include_azure' beyond the schema's type/default, adding critical meaning.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'GDPR obligations' specific to a role, distinguishing it from siblings like get_article or get_role_scenarios.

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 implies usage for role-specific obligations but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives among many sibling tools.

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