get_access_policy

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description adds real value beyond them: the policy source (UDMCP_POLICY) and the crucial semantics that an absent policy means unrestricted operation. It stops short of saying whether the returned policy is raw text or parsed rules.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the source and the absent-policy semantics are packed into one clause each.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and the description covers the source and the meaning of an empty result. The only gap is what the policy actually controls or which operations it can restrict.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and it correctly spends no words on parameters.

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?

States a specific verb (Show) and a specific resource (the optional local policy from UDMCP_POLICY). No sibling tool deals with policy, so it is distinguishable, though 'UDMCP_POLICY' is an unexplained identifier an agent may not recognize as an environment variable.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent infers it should call this to inspect whether a local policy constrains operations. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or reference to alternatives, though the sibling set offers no competing policy tool.

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