Get DataLens permissions on many objects

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavioral value: visibility-gated results (visible object returns permissions) and explicit NOT_FOUND semantics for missing objects, which an agent cannot derive from the annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences with no waste; the scope statement is front-loaded before the return-shape detail. The opening 'What the caller may do' is slightly indirect for a tool that actually returns permission data, but it is efficient overall.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return shape – and it does partially describe the three id-keyed maps and the NOT_FOUND case. It omits the actual form of a 'permissions' value (roles/permission bits), which is the main remaining gap for a bulk read tool.

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 three id-array parameters are self-documenting, so baseline 3 applies. The description explains that the three maps are keyed by id, mapping inputs to response structure, but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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 – retrieving what the caller may do with entries, workbooks and collections – and the scope ('many ... in one call') makes the bulk nature explicit. It does not name the singular permissions-get siblings (e.g. datalens_entries_permissions_get), so the distinction is inferable rather than stated.

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?

'in one call' implies this is the batched alternative to per-object permission lookups, which is useful implied guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative, so the agent must infer the routing from the word 'bulk' alone.

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