list_permissions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does disclose the return content (subjects and their roles), which is useful behavioral context. It stops short of stating permission/auth requirements, pagination, or behavior on inaccessible or nonexistent files.

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?

One compact sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and the return content neatly bracketed. No padding or redundancy.

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 read-only single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate: it explains return content in lieu of a schema. It still omits auth/permission prerequisites and scope of listing (direct vs inherited permissions), which an agent might need.

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 0% and the single parameter is required, so the description must compensate. Saying permissions apply to a "file/folder" adds mild meaning by implying file_id accepts both resource types, but it does not explain ID format or behavior for invalid IDs.

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 a specific verb ("List") and resource ("permissions") scoped to a file/folder, and the parenthetical clarifies the returned content (who has access and with what role). It is clearly distinguishable from write siblings like share_file and remove_permission, though it never explicitly names an alternative.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. The agent must infer that this is the read-side counterpart to share_file/remove_permission from the name and siblings alone; the description offers no routing signal.

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