opencdr_ir_roles_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the trailing "Read-only." is largely redundant. The description does add real semantic context by explaining what a role mapping actually is (IAM role per AWS account), but it says nothing about pagination behavior even though page_size and next_token are exposed.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource, with the clarifying parenthetical doing real work. The only wasted content is the redundant "Read-only" clause.

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?

A simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema needs at minimum pagination semantics, which are missing. The concept explanation is a genuine plus, but an agent still cannot predict paging behavior or the shape of returned mappings.

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%, so the description carries the full burden for page_size and next_token, and it provides no information about either. It does not state that results are paginated, what the default page size is, or how next_token is used to continue — the agent must infer all of this from parameter names alone.

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 and resource ("List IR role mappings") and adds a clarifying gloss explaining that a mapping ties an AWS account to the IAM role the responder assumes. This is clear enough to distinguish it from the plural-list siblings and from opencdr_ir_roles_get, though it never names the get sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by "List" plus the absence of any identifier parameter, so an agent can infer this is the enumerate-all variant. But there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over opencdr_ir_roles_get or on prerequisites for enumeration.

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