permission-getMemberPermissions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get a specific member's permissions' without mentioning whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are returned, authentication requirements, or side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate tool 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?

The description is very concise (one sentence plus a tag), but this brevity sacrifices necessary details. It is front-loaded but not every sentence earns its place; the tag '(Tags: Permissions)' adds minimal value.

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 has two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not mention the return value format, error conditions, or any contextual information needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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 must add meaning to parameters. However, it does not describe the two required parameters (workspacePublicId, memberPublicId) at all. It merely alludes to 'member' and 'workspace' without explaining what values are expected or how to obtain them.

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 'Get a specific member's permissions in a workspace', which includes a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific member's permissions'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like permission-getMyPermissions (self) and permission-getRolePermissions (role-based).

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 retrieving a specific member's permissions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like permission-getMyPermissions. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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