list_roles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the action in slightly more detail. It does not mention required permissions, potential side effects, ordering, inclusions (e.g., @everyone), or any other behavioral traits beyond the name itself.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action and scope. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant or extraneous content.

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 an output schema, the description is minimally adequate, but it lacks usage guidance and behavioral details such as permission requirements or context about what 'all roles' includes. The output schema likely explains the return shape, so that omission is acceptable, but the absence of usage context prevents a higher score.

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 0% description coverage for guild_id, leaving the description to compensate. The phrase 'in a Discord guild' implies that guild_id identifies the guild, but it does not add any format, validation, or usage detail beyond what the parameter name already suggests. For a single obvious parameter, the description provides minimal but sufficient semantic support.

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 ('List') and resource ('all roles in a Discord guild'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_channels, list_categories, and get_member_roles. The scope is explicit ('all roles') and the target container is specified ('a Discord guild').

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 list_roles versus alternatives such as get_member_roles or list_channels. While the purpose is implicit from the name and context, there is no explicit context, exclusion, or mention of alternative tools.

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