seerr_get_user_settings_permissions

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description aligns with this but adds no additional behavioral context such as authentication requirements, response format, or side effects. With annotations present, the bar is lower, and the description meets the minimum but adds no extra value.

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 a single, direct sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for such a simple tool, earning a high score for efficiency.

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?

The tool is straightforward, but the description lacks context about what permission settings are, how they relate to the user object, or any usage conditions. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but more context would help the agent understand the scope and limitations.

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 only parameter, user_id, has no schema description, and the tool description does not explain where to obtain it or any constraints. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to compensate but does not, leaving the parameter semantics entirely to inference from the name.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with a specific resource ('permission settings for a user'), clearly differentiating from sibling tools like seerr_get_user_settings_main or seerr_get_user_settings_password. However, it doesn't elaborate on what 'permission settings' includes, so it is specific but not deeply descriptive.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is the read-only counterpart to seerr_create_user_settings_permissions, nor does it describe any prerequisites or exclusions.

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