tempo_get_roles

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

readOnlyHint already establishes the safe read profile, and 'Retrieve all' adds a scoping fact consistent with that annotation. The description does not mention pagination, response size, or auth, but these are less critical for a low-complexity read endpoint.

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 four-word sentence with no filler; it starts with the action verb and states the resource immediately. Every word earns its place and the size is appropriate for a no-required-arg read.

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 only one optional enum parameter and a schema that already explains response shaping, the short description is nearly sufficient. There is no output schema, so the exact shape of a role is left to the agent, but that is a minor gap for a simple enumeration read.

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 sole parameter view is fully documented in the schema, including compact/full behavior, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline.

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 ('Retrieve') and a precise resource/scope ('all Tempo roles'). No sibling tool targets roles, so an agent can distinguish it from the many worklog, team, account, and timesheet tools without opening schemas.

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 intended use is clear when a caller needs the full role collection, and 'all' signals an unfiltered retrieval. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool offers role retrieval, so the omission is not costly.

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