get_site_roles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. While 'Get list' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this requires authentication, what format the list returns (e.g., paginated, filtered), or any rate limits. The description is minimal and leaves key behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 a single, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and gets straight to the point with no unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (which should document return values), the description's minimalism is somewhat acceptable. However, for a tool with no annotations and incomplete parameter documentation, it should provide more context about behavior and usage. The description is adequate but leaves clear gaps in understanding how to effectively use the tool.

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 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'site' which relates to the 'site_url' parameter, providing some context about what the parameter represents. However, it doesn't specify the expected format of the site_url (e.g., full URL, domain name) or any validation rules, leaving gaps in parameter understanding.

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 verb ('Get list') and resource ('users with access to the site'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_sites' or 'get_url_info', which could provide related but different information about sites.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'get_sites' (listing sites) and 'get_url_info' (getting URL details), there's no indication of when this specific tool for site roles is appropriate or what prerequisites might be needed.

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