access_management.get_roles

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by specifying the exact GET endpoint, stating it returns the raw role list, and documenting an `{"error": "..."}` failure shape. This is transparent beyond the structured fields, though it does not cover auth or rate-limit behavior.

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 generally tight and front-loaded, starting with the action and endpoint. There is minor redundancy between 'Returns the raw role list...' and the later 'Returns: list[dict[str, Any]]...' line, but it remains compact and readable.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list endpoint with no output schema, this description is complete. It includes the endpoint, success return type, failure format, and a representative use case, so an agent has enough information to invoke it correctly and interpret the result.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema already covers everything relevant. The description still adds useful return semantics with the list/error types, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve', names the exact resource ('all Sisense roles'), and even spells out the HTTP endpoint `GET /api/roles`. This clearly distinguishes the tool from the many sibling getters that target users, groups, dashboards, or datamodel objects.

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?

It gives a concrete use case: building role name-to-ID maps for multi-tenant migration workflows. This helps an agent understand when this exact list is needed, though it does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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