security-test-item-acl

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes this is a safe read operation, consistent with the verb 'Tests'. The description adds the identity scope (user or role) but says nothing about what the result looks like or what happens on denial; with annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though so brief that it leaves behavioral and return-value context unaddressed.

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 permission-test tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain what the test returns (boolean, effective rights, etc.) or how id/path/database interact. Adequate given the rich schema, but the missing return semantics is a real gap for a 'test' 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema itself fully documents id, path, database, identity, propType, and accessRight. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Tests) and resource (whether a user or role has specific access rights to a Sitecore item). The verb 'Tests' is distinguishable from sibling operations like security-get-item-acl and security-set-item-acl, though the description does not name those siblings explicitly.

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 purpose implies usage (checking permissions), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or reference to alternatives such as security-get-item-acl or security-set-item-acl. An agent must infer the scenario.

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