set_agent_role

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool sets a role, requires admin privileges, and has a conditional parameter for group_admin. However, it does not describe the mutation's impact (e.g., whether previous roles are revoked, if changes are reversible, or any side effects).

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 sentences, front-loading the main purpose and then adding a constraint. Every sentence contributes without redundancy.

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 no output schema and 3 parameters with 100% schema coverage, the description covers caller restrictions and the conditional parameter. However, it lacks behavioral details like whether the change is immediate, error conditions (e.g., invalid role for certain agents), or effects on existing group assignments, leaving some gaps.

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%. The description adds value by clarifying that managed_group_id is only required when role is group_admin, reinforcing the schema's note. For agent_id and role, the description does not add beyond schema, but the overall nuance raises it above baseline 3.

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 '设置' (set) and the resource 'Agent 角色' (agent role), lists the three possible roles (admin, member, group_admin), and includes a specific note about group_admin needing managed_group_id. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like register_agent or query_agents.

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 context: '仅 admin 可调用' (only admin can call) and 'group_admin 需指定 managed_group_id' (group_admin requires managed_group_id). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when to use set_agent_role versus register_agent or other agent management tools.

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