Get role

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does signal a read-only single-object fetch. It says nothing about behavior on a missing/invalid OID, permission requirements, or whether the returned role includes assignments/entitlements, leaving real gaps for an unannotated 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?

Two short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no padding. The second sentence is compact but only loosely related to this tool, so it slightly dilutes focus rather than earning its place fully.

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 a single required parameter and an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, and the shape is adequately conveyed. However, for an unannotated tool it omits not-found/error behavior and the scope of the fetched role, leaving it only minimally viable.

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% (the oid parameter is documented as "the midPoint object OID"), so the baseline is 3. The description repeats "by OID" without adding format details or where OIDs are obtained; the display-name remark hints at an OID-vs-name distinction but does not clarify the parameter itself.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb and resource ("Fetch a single midPoint role by OID"), which implicitly separates it from list-oriented siblings such as list_roles and list_requestable_roles. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 only implied: the agent must infer it should call this when it already holds a role OID and wants one record rather than a list. The second sentence talks about how to refer to people/roles/requests when writing to a person, which is tangential to selecting get_role and offers no explicit when-not or alternative.

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