Contract Testing: Admin List Permissions

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the admin-only context and pagination parameters, but it does not disclose behavior such as sort order, response format, or pagination limits beyond the default values.

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 short and front-loads the core purpose, but it includes redundant content: 'Toolset: Admin' duplicates the parenthetical admin qualifier, and the parameter section repeats the schema exactly. It is not bloated, but not every line earns its place.

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-only paginated list with two optional, well-documented parameters and strong safety annotations, the description is mostly sufficient. However, there is no output schema and the description does not explain the response shape or whether permission scope names/IDs are returned, leaving some ambiguity.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both pageNumber and pageSize already documented with defaults. The description simply repeats the schema parameters without adding extra meaning, so it neither compensates for a schema gap nor provides additional semantic value.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'List all available permission scopes (admin).' This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling admin tools that concern users, roles, or teams, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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 alternative admin list tools such as admin_list_roles or admin_list_users. The '(admin)' qualifier implies a prerequisite but no explicit usage context, exclusions, or decision guidance is given.

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