List Permission Templates

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. The description adds marginal behavioral context (pagination, metadata in response) but does not disclose rate limits, auth requirements, or other operational details beyond what annotations already convey.

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 four sentences with clear front-loading: purpose, usage, output type, pagination, required parameter. The addition of the API endpoint is slightly redundant but not harmful. Overall well-structured and 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (5 params, 1 required, no output schema), the description is comprehensive. It covers purpose, usage, pagination, filtering, required parameter, and API endpoint, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to select or invoke the tool correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds explanation for filters__type (default value), view (detailed mode), and pagination parameters, providing useful context 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 returns permission template names and IDs for a specified company, and specifies to use it for paginated overviews. It effectively distinguishes the tool's purpose from the many sibling tools by providing context and usage guidance.

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 offers some usage guidance (enumerate records, paginated overview, find IDs, filter), but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like list_permission_templates_for_a_company_user or list_project_permission_templates. This leaves a gap in decision support.

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