Explain permissions

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety. The description adds behavioral context by explaining that results are derived through the role and overwrite chain and that the actor can be the bot or a member, going beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 two sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. The second sentence is a concise metaphor that adds value without fluff, making it highly 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?

With no output schema, the description conveys the basic result ('Answer whether' and 'explain the result') but does not specify the exact return format. Given the tool's simplicity and strong schema coverage, it is adequate but not fully explicit.

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 the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the meanings of 'actor', 'channel', and permission context but does not add new syntax or format details beyond the schema descriptions.

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 answers whether an actor has a given permission and explains the result via the role and overwrite chain. It specifies a distinct verb ('Answer') and resource (permission check), differentiating it from siblings like get_member_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 'preflight engine, made directly askable' metaphor implies use for preflight permission checks, but it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools like get_member_permissions or get_channel_permissions, nor provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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