Get User Roles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read operation, but the description says nothing about required permissions, whether inherited roles are included, or error behavior for invalid users.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple read tool, though its extreme brevity contributes to the gaps in other dimensions.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate: an agent can infer it retrieves a user's roles when a user identifier is known. However, with no annotations and no parameter descriptions, it leaves open key details about uid format and usage context.

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 should compensate for the undocumented uid parameter. It only implies that uid identifies a user ('assigned to a user') without specifying whether it expects a numeric ID, username, UUID, or another format.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get roles assigned to a user.' It clearly separates this from an all-roles listing by scoping to a particular user, but it does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings like list_roles, assign_role, or remove_role.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_roles or get_user. The implied use case is obvious, but no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are stated.

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