workiva_list_organization_roles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not state that the operation is read-only, mention required permissions, or describe return format/pagination. Only the verb 'list' hints at non-mutating behavior, which is insufficient.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. However, the 'Args: org_id: Organization ID' section is redundant with the schema and adds little value, so it is not entirely without waste.

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 an output schema available, the description need not explain return values. For a simple list operation, it mentions the scope (organization) and resource (roles), but omits details like pagination, auth requirements, or role definitions. It is minimally viable but lacks richer context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only says 'org_id: Organization ID', which essentially repeats the parameter name and schema title 'Org Id'. It adds no meaningful detail about format, constraints, or usage beyond what is already obvious.

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 'List roles in an organization' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like workiva_list_organization_users and workiva_list_organization_solutions, which target different entities.

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 implies usage when roles need to be listed for an organization, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention any exclusions. The context is clear from the tool name and description, but no direct guidance is provided.

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