Listar roles de invitación

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

The verb 'Lista' clearly indicates a read-only operation, and no side effects are mentioned. However, since no annotations exist, the description carries the full burden; it does not explicitly state that no data is modified, but this is strongly implied.

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 begins with a clear verb and contains no unnecessary words or details. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 no-parameter list operation, the description provides sufficient context about what is listed. It does not describe the output format, but this is a minor gap given the simplicity of the operation and the absence of an output schema.

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 has no properties, so schema description coverage is effectively 100%. The description adds no parameter semantics because there are no parameters to describe, matching the baseline for high coverage.

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 specific action ('Lista') and the resource ('roles disponibles para asignar en invitaciones del tenant'), making it distinct from sibling tools like list_invitations or list_roles.

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 implies usage for invitation-related role assignment but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or provide conditions for when to choose this over others. No direct guidance is given.

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