list_custom_roles

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

The description adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: pagination mechanics, caching, plan-gating requiring Enterprise, degradation to upstream_error on lower plans, and cursor staleness behavior. This all enriches the agent's understanding.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core action, efficiently packed with essential details. No redundant wording.

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 the tool's complexity (pagination, caching, plan-gating, multiple options), the description covers all critical behavioral aspects. Without an output schema, it describes the default projection and verbose alternative, ensuring the agent knows what to expect.

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?

All 7 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds context for limit default and verbose, but the schema already documents each parameter adequately. Hence the description adds moderate additional value.

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 returns custom agent roles as paginated skeletons, listing the default fields (id, name, team_member_count, updated_at). It distinguishes from system roles, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains default limit, cursor pagination, and options like verbose. It notes the distinction from system roles but does not explicitly contrast with the sibling get_custom_role. Still, the context is clear enough for an agent.

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