List users in a specific role

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by naming the required permissions (view_users, assign_roles, manage_roles), but it is ambiguous whether all are needed or any one suffices, and nothing is said about result scope across organizations.

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 second sentence largely restates the first ('List users in a specific role' vs 'Gets a list of users in a role'), so a sentence does not fully earn its place. The permission string is compressed into an unexplained abbreviation ('Perm:'), which is terse but not front-loaded.

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 an output schema present and 100% schema coverage, the description needn't explain return values or parameters. However, for a nine-parameter, open-world listing tool connected to role management siblings, the absence of any routing guidance leaves an agent to infer when this tool is the right choice.

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 all nine parameters (from, limit, cursor, filter, sortby, verbose, auto_paginate, response_format, role_id) are already documented in the schema. The description only restates that role_id is the role's ID, adding nothing beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List users in a specific role') and the second sentence pins down the selector ('a role specified by its ID'). It is distinguishable from action1_list_user_roles and action1_list_users by the direction of the relationship, though it never explicitly contrasts with those siblings.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus action1_list_users, action1_list_user_roles, or action1_create_role_user/action1_delete_role_user. The only contextual hint is the permission list, which is prerequisite information rather than selection guidance.

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