Get a specific role

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description does add one piece of non-annotation context — the required permission 'manage_roles' — but says nothing about failure behavior for unknown IDs.

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 core purpose is front-loaded and the whole description is brief. But the second sentence ('Gets details about a role specified by its ID') largely restates the first, so not every sentence earns its place.

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 full input schema, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description only needs to add the permission requirement, which it does. Missing pieces are minor — e.g., what happens when the role is not found or belongs to another organization.

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 baseline is 3. The description only echoes that a role ID is required and adds nothing about the optional 'verbose' or 'response_format' parameters beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a specific role') and clarifies the lookup is by ID. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings such as action1_list_roles or action1_get_user, so the agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

'Specified by its ID' implicitly signals this is a single-record lookup requiring a known identifier, as opposed to a listing call. No explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or named alternative is given.

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