list_future_job_permissions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: it is 'Read-only', explains the auto-apply rule semantics, notes that null criteria mean 'any', and states which fields rows carry. It does not mention pagination, required permissions, or error cases, but for a simple read-only list tool this is solid 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?

Three compact sentences with zero waste. Purpose is front-loaded, followed by rule semantics and the user_id lookup hint, in a logical order.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool with an output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs: purpose, read-only nature, rule semantics, and how to obtain the required user_id. Return values are covered by the output schema, so no further detail is required.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single user_id parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds a concrete procedural step ('list_users → match by name') that slightly enriches the schema's 'get from list_users' note, justifying a small bump above the baseline 3.

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 and resource ('List auto-apply permission rules for a user') and describes what makes these rules distinct from ordinary job permissions (they 'automatically grant the user a role on new jobs'). This lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like list_job_permissions without opening their schemas.

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 what the rules are but never states when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_job_permissions or add_future_job_permission. The only procedural guidance is for finding user_id via list_users, which is parameter help rather than tool-selection guidance.

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