Lists The App And Tool Level Permissions For The User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral details: paginated results, pagination metadata, and the use of page/per_page parameters. This usefully supplements the annotations.

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 moderately concise and well-structured: it starts with purpose, then usage, return type, pagination, required param, and API details. Each sentence adds value, though it could be more succinct.

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 read tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it states the return type (paginated JSON array), pagination mechanism, required parameter, and even the full API endpoint. Missing details about output structure or error handling, but overall adequate.

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 highlights company_id as required and mentions page/per_page for pagination, but does not elaborate on other parameters. This adds minimal semantic value 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 is inconsistent: it first says 'Lists the App and Tool level permissions for the user' but then says 'Use this to read information about Document Markup records' and 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Document Markup records.' This conflates two different purposes and creates confusion about what the tool actually returns.

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 gives basic usage context: it is for reading Document Markup records, and it mentions pagination control and required parameter company_id. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools or specify when not to use it (e.g., alternatives like document_markup_permissions). No exclusions are provided.

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