Show Permission Manifest

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds valuable context: it returns a single JSON object, explicitly states it is read-only and changes nothing, and describes error payloads with common HTTP statuses (401, 403, 404). This fully discloses behavior and failure modes.

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 compact, with purpose, usage, behavioral notes, and endpoint reference packed into a few sentences. No filler or redundancy, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 show tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, when to use it, error behavior, and the API location. There is no missing information that would prevent an agent from invoking it 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%: all three parameters have clear descriptions indicating when to use company_id vs project_id and what filter_correspondence_types does. The description adds no extra parameter details, so it relies on the schema, which is already sufficient. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it shows a company or project permission manifest for the current user, with a specific verb ('show'/'returns') and resource. It also distinguishes itself from list/search tools by specifying 'when you already know which permission manifest you want and need its full field set.'

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: use when you already know which manifest you want and need its full field set. It implies not to use for discovery or listing, though it doesn't name a specific alternative tool. Error cases are also mentioned, helping set expectations.

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