haops_read_role_template

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Discloses that it's a read operation (non-destructive), returns specific fields with hydrated defaultSkills, and mentions raw parameter effect. But lacks depth on error handling, authentication, performance, or caching behavior.

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?

Two sentences, each purposeful. First states purpose and return value, second gives usage guideline. No filler, well 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?

For a simple read tool with two parameters and no output schema, description is fairly complete: covers return fields, identifier format, and workflow order. Could note error cases or relationship to update/history tools, but sufficient for basic usage.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context about hydrated vs structured JSON output for defaultSkills, which complements schema. However, raw parameter is only briefly mentioned and doesn't add significant new meaning.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Read' and resource 'role template' with identifier 'kebab-case name'. It distinguishes from sibling tool haops_list_role_templates by specifying usage order and that it fetches full contents.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use after haops_list_role_templates to fetch the full template contents', providing clear workflow context. However, it does not mention alternatives like haops_get_role_template_history or haops_update_role_template, nor when not to use.

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