users_list_role_settings

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

The description mentions behavioral traits: includes inherited settings, cached for 10 minutes, and role-specific configurations. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but the caching detail adds value.

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 concise, with a clear opening sentence. Bullet points structure the information well for quick scanning. Each sentence adds value, though the use cases slightly repeat the purpose.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (role settings, inherited, cached). It could mention pagination or limits, but the current level is sufficient for typical use.

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 already describes the 'id' parameter as 'ID of the user'. The description adds an example usage and context (e.g., 'Get role settings: { "id": 123 }'). This goes beyond the schema, which is adequate given 100% coverage.

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 it lists user role settings. The verb 'List' and resource 'user role settings' are specific. The second sentence 'Returns all role-based settings for the specified user' reinforces the purpose. It distinguishes from siblings like users_list_role_assignments by focusing on settings rather than assignments.

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?

Workflow tips and common use cases provide clear guidance on when to use the tool, e.g., 'Check visibility and access settings' and 'Review user's role configuration'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or differentiate from similar sibling tools like roles_get_role_settings.

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