roles_create

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), but the description adds valuable behavioral nuance: it warns that `permissions` is a base-10 STRING due to JS number safety, and it discloses the return payload fields. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it does not mention permissions prerequisites or audit-log side effects.

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 tightly structured with bolded headers for Purpose, When to use, and Returns. Every sentence adds value: purpose, use-case, a critical parameter tip, and return shape. No fluff or repetition.

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 9 parameters and a fully descriptive schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, when to use it, a key parameter caveat, and the return structure. The output schema also exists, so the return fields are fully documented elsewhere. No critical gaps remain.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds important semantic detail for the `permissions` parameter (base-10 string, bitfields exceed JS safety), which is not obvious from the schema alone. This elevates the parameter understanding beyond the structured field descriptions.

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 states 'Create a new role in a guild' – a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like roles_modify, roles_delete, and roles_list. No ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 'When to use' section provides explicit context ('Programmatic role provisioning (e.g. tier-based roles, integration roles)'), which helps guide selection. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of full guidance.

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