get_standalone_role_doc

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals non-mutating behavior; the description adds no additional behavioral details such as permissions, return format, or failure modes. It contributes contextual clarity about identifier origin and scope, but no deep behavioral transparency beyond the annotation.

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 three short sentences, front-loads the core action, and every sentence adds distinct value: what it does, when to use it, and what it does not cover. No filler or redundant implementation details.

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?

With a single well-defined parameter, readOnlyHint annotation, and an output schema present, the description covers the essential operational context. It tells the agent exactly where identifiers come from and clarifies the boundary against a sibling tool, making it sufficient for effective invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter is already fully documented. The description reiterates the namespace.role format and references search_standalone_roles, which slightly reinforces meaning, but it does not add materially beyond the schema.

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 states specifically that the tool gets documentation for a standalone role using a 2-part namespace.role identifier. It clearly distinguishes from get_role_doc by stating it does not cover collection roles, so the purpose is unambiguous and differentiates among sibling 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?

Explicit usage context is provided: use for standalone roles discovered with search_standalone_roles. It also gives a clear exclusion by saying it does not replace get_role_doc for collection roles, effectively naming the alternative.

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