list_rolesFetch paginated agent roles from Freshservice so you can assign the correct role when creating an agent.
List agent roles (needed for create_agent's roles).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number, starting at 1 | |
| per_page | No | Records per page (max 100) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds only the downstream-consumption context and says nothing about result volume, pagination behavior, or whether the list is tenant-scoped (openWorldHint=true suggests it may vary).
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource comes first and the usage cue second. Nothing could be removed without losing information.
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 two-parameter read-only list tool with an output schema, full parameter documentation, and complete annotations, the description covers purpose and the reason to call it. It could go slightly further by noting that results are paginated and that create_agent needs the returned role identifiers, but nothing essential is missing.
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 100% — both page and per_page are documented with defaults and bounds in the schema. The description adds no parameter guidance, so baseline 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?
States a specific verb and resource ("List agent roles") and ties the output to a downstream need (create_agent's roles). It is clearly distinguishable from group/requester siblings, though it doesn't differentiate itself from other list-type tools in any deeper way.
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 parenthetical "needed for create_agent's roles" tells the agent exactly when to reach for this tool — before calling create_agent — which is the primary use case. It stops short of naming exclusions or an alternative source for role data.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.