swsd_list_roles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that it returns specific fields and a use case, but does not further detail behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, query behavior). The description is consistent with annotations.

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 action ('List SWSD roles'), and includes essential information without any waste. Every sentence 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?

For a simple list tool, the description covers purpose, return fields, and a use case. The existence of an output schema (not shown) likely covers output structure. Could be slightly more explicit about list nature, but overall complete.

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 parameters (page, per_page, query) are already documented with descriptions, defaults, and constraints. The description does not add parameter-specific information, which is acceptable given the schema completeness.

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 lists SWSD roles, provides a parenthetical clarification ('permission profiles'), and specifies the returned fields (id, name, description). No sibling tool lists roles, so it is well-differentiated.

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 gives a concrete use case ('understanding what users can do when triaging permission-related tickets'). It implicitly indicates when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives; however, no alternative exists among siblings.

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