taiga_roles_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It does not disclose whether listing is global or per-project, any ordering or pagination behavior, required permissions, or the return format. The phrase 'Filter by project' is the only behavioral hint and is under-specified.

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 two short sentences with no filler or repeated information. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded, with every word contributing to the basic understanding.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves key questions unanswered: does it list all roles when no project is given? What is the response structure? The description is too minimal for an agent to fully anticipate behavior.

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 fully documents the single parameter as 'Project ID', and the description's 'Filter by project' adds little beyond restating the parameter's purpose. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and no additional meaning is provided.

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 the tool lists roles and mentions filtering by project, making the action and resource unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling list tools, but the resource 'roles' is unique among the available tools.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as taiga_roles_get or taiga_roles_create. The optional project filter is mentioned but not contextualized, and no exclusions or alternative scenarios are described.

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