Get Channel Permissions

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

The description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), stating it retrieves permission overrides. It adds the return type (list of overrides with allow/deny per role/member), which provides useful context beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear purpose sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, and there is no extraneous information.

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 simple read tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (list of permission overrides). Annotations cover behavioral safety, and parameters are fully covered by schema and description. The tool's context is complete.

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 both parameters are documented in the schema. The description mentions both parameters and adds that response_format defaults to 'json', but the schema already includes a default value, so the added value is minimal. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get all permission overrides for a channel.' The verb 'get' and resource 'permission overrides for a channel' are specific, distinguishing it from sibling tools like discord_set_channel_permissions and discord_remove_channel_permissions.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied by the verb 'get', but no direct guidance on when not to use or references to sibling tools are provided. The sibling list exists but is not referenced in the description.

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