get-user-roles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the return structure ({ realmMappings, clientMappings }) and scopes the operation to directly assigned roles, but does not mention read-only semantics, required permissions, or error behavior. The added detail about the return shape provides some value beyond the schema, but the lack of annotation support leaves gaps.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately states the action, target, and return shape. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 operation with two self-explanatory parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It specifies the return structure and the 'directly assigned' scope. It could elaborate on the exact structure of realmMappings and clientMappings, but given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, this is a minor gap.

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?

The input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters ('realm' and 'userId'), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional detail about the parameters beyond what the schema already states, such as the nature of the userId (e.g., internal ID vs username). No extra semantic value is provided.

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 retrieves all roles directly assigned to a user, with the specific verb 'Get' and the resource being 'roles directly assigned to a user'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list-roles' (all roles in a realm) and 'get-group-roles' (roles assigned to a group) by focusing on the user's direct assignments.

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 phrase 'directly assigned' implies the tool should be used when needing only direct assignments, not composite or inherited roles, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. Despite lacking explicit exclusions, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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