agileconfig_set_user_permissions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether setting permissions overwrites existing ones, if any authentication is required, or side effects. The description only lists available permissions without behavioral details.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. However, it could benefit from a more structured breakdown of permissions and scope.

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?

The description lacks essential context for a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. It does not explain whether the operation is additive or destructive, or provide expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 schema covers both parameters (userId, permissions) with descriptions, but the tool description adds significant value by explaining the permissions JSON format and the meaning of 'GLOBAL' vs specific 'appId'. This clarifies the structure beyond the schema's generic description.

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 states the tool sets user permissions and lists the specific permissions (e.g., APP_ADD, CONFIG_ADD/EDIT/DELETE/PUBLISH), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'agileconfig_create_user' which creates users, and 'agileconfig_get_user_permissions' which retrieves permissions.

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 explains the permissions scope (global vs per-app) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when to update permissions versus when to create a user or get permissions. The usage context is implied but not directly stated.

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