redmine_role_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently shows this is a read-only operation via the GET method constant. It does not disclose error behavior, authentication needs, or any response-shape details, but for a simple fetch, the method and endpoint provide adequate baseline transparency.

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 contains the verb, resource, and endpoint with no filler. The key action is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter read endpoint with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it provides the action, resource, endpoint, and method, while the schema covers the required id. The only minor omission is an explicit statement of return value or error behavior, but the simplicity of the tool keeps this from being a significant gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially does by mapping id to the :id placeholder in the endpoint, making clear the parameter identifies the role to fetch. It adds little beyond the schema, but for a single obvious id parameter, this is sufficient to invoke correctly.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get role') and includes the exact endpoint (GET /roles/:id.json), which identifies a single-resource fetch rather than a list operation. It distinguishes from the sibling redmine_roles_list by singular resource and id path parameter, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the endpoint and required id clearly suggest using this tool when you need one role by ID. However, the description gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over redmine_roles_list or other related tools, and it does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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