list_permissions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, making the safety profile clear. The description adds only scope ('logged in user') but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as return format or required authentication, which is not needed given the annotations.

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 filler, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, strong annotations, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose. However, 'access information' is somewhat vague about what exactly is returned, but this is a minor gap for such a straightforward tool.

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 schema has zero parameters, so baseline 4 is appropriate. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it does not add irrelevant parameter information.

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 'Get access information of logged in user' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling list_* tools by focusing on the authenticated user's permissions. It states both the action and the scope (logged in user).

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are mentioned, but the purpose is self-evident enough that an agent can infer usage. It does not state exclusions or when not to use, so it falls at the 'implied usage' level.

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