rm_update_role

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Update' aligns with a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as side effects, permission requirements, or whether unspecified role properties are affected.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains no filler, which is efficient. However, it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, omitting parameter context and usage details that would make the short length valuable.

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 update tool with zero schema coverage and no usage guidance, this description is too thin. The output schema relieves the need to explain return values, but the agent still lacks enough information to know what updating a role entails or how to fill the parameters 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%, and the description does not explain role_id or name parameters. It only restates the action without indicating that name is the updatable field or how role_id should be provided, leaving the agent with no meaningful semantic guidance.

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 uses the verb 'Update' with the resource 'role', and the word 'existing' distinguishes it from create/delete/list role siblings. It is not maximally informative about scope or fields, but it is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus rm_create_role or rm_delete_role, and there is no mention of prerequisites like the role already existing. The verb 'Update' implies modification, but the description leaves the routing decision entirely to inference.

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