Contract Testing: Admin Get Role

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

The description identifies this as an admin-level read operation, adding an authorization signal not present in the annotations. It is consistent with readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and does not contradict them.

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 main sentence is concise and front-loaded, with a short toolset label and parameter list. The parameter list is redundant with the schema but does not make the description overly long or difficult to scan.

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 one-parameter, read-only, idempotent retrieval by UUID, the description provides enough information to invoke the tool correctly. It does not describe response shape or not-found behavior, but the operation is simple and no output schema is provided.

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%, and the description simply restates roleId/UUID with no additional semantic details such as format constraints, lookup behavior, or error conditions. The schema fully documents the only parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('details for a specific role by UUID'), so an agent knows exactly what the tool does. It distinguishes from list-style tools by emphasizing 'specific role by UUID', but it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as admin_list_roles. 'Toolset: Admin' provides context but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use direction.

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