creer_role

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'APERÇU' is the only behavioral hint and it is ambiguous — the agent cannot tell whether the role is actually persisted, whether a confirmation/approval step follows, what permissions are needed, or whether creation is reversible.

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?

Three short fragments, zero filler, with the operation named up front and the two non-obvious parameter formats attached. The compressed telegraphic style leaves the 'APERÇU' marker under-explained, but nothing is wasted.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, this is thin. It never addresses the missing parameter semantics, the preview/commit model, or the interaction with the prepare/approve/execute siblings.

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, and it does partially: it explains that 'permissions' is a text-encoded decimal mask and 'couleur' is an integer RGB value, which is genuinely valuable for otherwise opaque fields. It says nothing about 'nom' or 'affiche_separement', and does not explain how the permission mask bits map to permissions.

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 ('Créer un rôle'), which is distinguishable from siblings like modifier_role, supprimer_role and role_membre. It does not however name those siblings or clarify where role creation sits relative to the plan/approval tools.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as modifier_role or the plan/execution siblings. The leading word 'APERÇU' implies a preview mode but never explains what triggers a real creation versus a preview.

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