request_access

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses: shows a single dialog, user allows/denies whole set, returns granted/denied apps and screenshot filtering capability, behavior on re-call (previously granted apps remain granted). This is thorough behavioral coverage.

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?

Description is a single paragraph with multiple informative sentences. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the most important information. Slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, description explains return values (granted apps, denied apps, screenshot filtering). It covers prerequisites, behavior, and re-calls. For a tool with 5 parameters (all documented in schema) and no output schema, the description is complete.

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 schema already describes all parameters. Description adds context about the dialog and overall behavior but does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides for individual parameters. 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'request permission' and the resource 'control a set of applications for this session'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by stating it must be called before any other tool, and no other tool in the list handles permission requests.

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?

Explicitly states 'Must be called before any other tool' and 'Call this again mid-session to add more apps', providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, though the context implies it.

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