elenchus_get_role_prompt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It describes the output content but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, idempotent, or free of side effects. Since it is a getter, the agent might infer it is safe, but it is not stated.

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 one efficient sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and includes specific content details. Every word adds value.

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's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description adequately conveys what the tool returns and its structure (must-do/must-not-do rules, templates, checklists). It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's value, though it could mention if the prompt is static or configurable.

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 input schema already provides a complete description of the 'role' parameter (including enum and description at 100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond confirming the roles. Per guidelines, baseline 3 when schema_coverage is high.

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 retrieves detailed role prompts for 'Verifier' or 'Critic' and lists what it includes (rules, templates, checklists). It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the specific roles, and the verb 'Get' indicates retrieval. No ambiguity.

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 implies usage: use when you need the prompt for a verifier or critic. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings (e.g., elenchus_generate_roles might be related). Lacks explicit guidance on context or exclusions.

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