gsa_output_extract_cur_perm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no indication of whether this is a read operation, whether it fails when no prior Output_Extract exists, or what state it depends on. The only behavioral hint is the implicit ordering dependency.

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 short sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb. It is efficient, though brevity here shades into under-specification.

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?

Because there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. The remaining gap is the opaque 'envelope permutation' concept and the implicit dependency on a prior gsa_output_extract call, which the description only hints at.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to document beyond the schema; baseline 4 applies per the rubric.

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?

Names a verb (Get) and a resource (envelope permutation of the last Output_Extract result), which separates it from the raw gsa_output_extract sibling. However, 'envelope permutation' is domain jargon that is not unpacked, so an agent unfamiliar with the GSA output API cannot tell precisely what value comes back.

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 phrase 'of last Output_Extract result' implies a prerequisite call to gsa_output_extract, which is useful context. It does not state when this should be preferred over the related extract/array variants or what happens if no extract was run.

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