retrieve_api_permissions_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds a useful caveat that not all actions are available for each endpoint, which helps an agent interpret the results when configuring roles.

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 definition is short and front-loaded, with the purpose stated immediately. There is slight redundancy between the title-like opening and the following sentence, but it remains efficient.

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 paginated list tool with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description is mostly complete. It explains the reference use case and the endpoint-specific action caveat, though it does not describe the returned permission shape.

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 parameter meanings are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, which is acceptable but does not exceed the baseline.

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 resource and action: list all available API permissions. It also explains their role as a reference for specifying roles, but does not explicitly contrast with role-oriented siblings like retrieve_role_list.

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?

It gives clear usage context by saying the list serves as a reference for specifying roles. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name an alternative sibling, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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