create_role

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose some useful behavior: the role is created with no project, and the 'why' parameter affects only the git message. However, it omits other side effects, such as whether an existing role file is overwritten, what permissions are needed, or what the response indicates.

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 deliver the core purpose, a scope constraint, and a key parameter clarification with no wasted words. The most important information is 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?

The tool has six parameters, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description explains only 'why' and the no-project scope, leaving key parameters like 'core', 'on_demand', and 'role_id' semantically underspecified. This is not enough for an agent to confidently construct a correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies only the 'why' parameter ('for the git message only'), while the domain-specific meanings of 'core', 'on_demand', and the relationship between 'name' and 'description' remain unexplained. This is insufficient for six parameters.

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 action and resource: 'Create a role file.' It adds a distinguishing behavioral fact—'The new role is on no project'—which helps differentiate this creation tool from project-scoped operations and from update/delete role tools.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_role or create_project. The statement about the new role being on no project hints at scope, but it does not say when this tool is appropriate or when another tool should be chosen instead.

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