directus_get_my_permissions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that this is a read-only operation, what format permissions are returned in, or what 'effective' means (computed permissions after role aggregation). No mention of caching, rate limits, or auth requirements.

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 brief and front-loaded with the action, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise that does not aid agent understanding. The single sentence earns its place but leaves critical gaps.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and a completely undocumented required parameter, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain the 'site' parameter, return value structure, or the concept of 'effective' permissions in Directus, all of which are necessary for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage for the required 'site' parameter. The description completely omits any explanation of what 'site' refers to (ID, URL, name?), what values are valid, or examples. With low schema coverage, the description must compensate but does not.

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 action (Get) and resource (current user's effective permissions), distinguishing it from siblings like directus_get_permission or directus_list_permissions by specifying 'my/current user'. However, it does not explicitly contrast with these sibling tools or explain what makes permissions 'effective'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this versus directus_get_permission or directus_list_permissions, nor does it mention prerequisites like authentication requirements. The tool name implies self-querying, but explicit guidance is absent.

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