Get Space Permissions

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

ReadOnlyHint annotation is present, and the description adds the API endpoint, return structure (JSON with 'results' list), and a note about Cloud vs. Server/Data Center compatibility. No contradictions.

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?

Description is very concise (5 sentences) with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose and structured logically: purpose, endpoint, compatibility note, return format, and use case.

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 read-only tool with complete annotations and output schema, the description covers the API endpoint, parameter details (via schema), return structure summary, and use case. No gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds valuable context for 'space_id' (numeric, not key, with example and how to find it). 'limit' and 'cursor' are standard, but the extra detail on 'space_id' justifies the higher score.

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 tool lists all permission assignments for a Confluence space, with a specific verb 'List' and resource 'permission assignments'. The sibling 'confluence_check_content_permissions' targets content permissions, so this tool is well-distinguished.

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 specifies auditing space access as the use case and mentions it is only for Confluence Cloud. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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