discover_organizational_roles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently describes the output format, including the structure of each role and the additional metadata (counts, preview). It implies a non-destructive, read-only operation, which is reasonable. The description provides sufficient behavioral context for an agent to understand what to expect.

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 description is relatively concise, with a clear front-loaded purpose followed by a bulleted list of output details. It avoids unnecessary words. However, it could be more concise by removing the 'pm4py returns' phrasing, but overall it is well-structured.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no usage guidance, the description is incomplete. While it extensively covers the output (which is already defined by an output schema), it fails to address parameter semantics and usage context. An agent would lack critical information to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, meaning the description does not explain any of the three parameters (log_id, activity_key, resource_key). The description focuses solely on output, offering no insight into how to set or use the parameters. This leaves agents guessing about parameter meaning and defaults.

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 clearly states that the tool discovers organizational roles, defined as activity-sharing clusters of resources. It details the output structure (List[Role] with activities and originator_importance) and mentions the returned handle 'org_roles' along with counts and a preview of the top 5 roles. This is specific, uses a verb, and distinguishes from other sibling 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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or compare with similar tools like discover_subcontracting_network or discover_handover_network. The agent is left to infer usage from the tool's purpose.

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