gorelo_list_billing_roles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by explaining how the returned Id is consumed (BillingRoleId on time entries), but says nothing about pagination, result shape, or whether roles are provider-scope vs client-scope. Reasonable but not rich.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the core purpose front-loaded and the downstream hint second. Every sentence 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 parameterless, read-only list tool with no output schema, the definition covers what the agent needs to select and use it, including the downstream Id usage. A brief note on what the list returns (Id, name, scope) would close the remaining 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this scores 4. The description does not need to explain inputs, and it does not misleadingly imply any.

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 ('Lists the billing roles configured for the service provider'), which is unambiguous and distinct from generic list_* siblings like list_users or list_groups. It stops short of explicitly differentiating itself from adjacent admin-listing tools, but the resource noun is specific enough for an agent to identify it.

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 second sentence gives concrete downstream guidance: use a role's Id as BillingRoleId when logging time against a ticket, effectively pointing to the time-entry workflow. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' or a named sibling alternative, which keeps it below a 5.

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