request_permission

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action and a constraint. It does not disclose whether the request is synchronous or asynchronous, what happens after the request, or how the decision is returned.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences: the first states the core action, and the second adds a key constraint. No unnecessary words.

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 tool that requests a permission decision with no output schema, the description lacks details about the return value, whether the call blocks, or how the decision is communicated. Additional context would be beneficial for correct invocation.

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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters (title and options), and the tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema offers. Schema coverage is 100%, placing baseline at 3.

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 that the tool sends an MCP elicitation to request a permission decision, and it explicitly notes that it does not require a running agent or session, which distinguishes it from session-dependent tools like grant_permission.

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 it can be used without a running agent or session, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use or avoid it compared to sibling tools like grant_permission.

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