swsd_list_roles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the perception that roles are permission profiles and names return fields (id, name, description), but discloses no pagination behavior, result limits, or auth requirements beyond the structured data.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, with no filler. Minor redundancy in restating return fields that the output schema already provides.

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, complete annotations, and fully documented parameters, the remaining burden on the description is purpose plus usage, both of which are supplied. Only minor gaps (e.g., expected result volume) keep it from a 5.

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% (page, query, per_page all documented), so the schema carries full parameter semantics. The description never mentions the name-substring filter or pagination, adding no meaning 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?

Specific verb+resource ('List SWSD roles') with a clarifying gloss '(permission profiles)' that removes ambiguity about what a role is in this API. It is clearly distinguishable from the incident/user/catalog list siblings, though it does not explicitly name or contrast a sibling.

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?

Provides a concrete when-to-use context: 'useful for understanding what users can do in SWSD when triaging permission-related tickets.' It gives clear context but no exclusions or explicit alternatives, so it falls just short of the top band.

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