superset_permission_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It explains pagination behavior, especially the 'get_all' parameter that 'ignores page/page_size', and clarifies that permissions are combinations of actions and resources. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only list operation, the disclosed behavior is adequate.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, a brief contextual sentence about permission structure, and a focused Args list. No redundant information, and the key points are front-loaded. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary but remains concise.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete for a list operation. It covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and the nature of the returned data. It lacks guidance on when to use it relative to sibling tools, but that is a usage guideline matter rather than a completeness gap here.

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 0%, so the description must define parameters. The Args section does this thoroughly: page describes start from 0, page_size explains default 100, q identifies as a RISON filter, and get_all specifies automatic pagination and that it ignores other pagination params. This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get the list of all available permissions (permission_view_menu) in Superset.' It specifies the resource and action, and distinguishes it from other permission-related tools by focusing on listing all permissions. The explanation of permission composition (action + resource) reinforces its purpose.

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 implies usage when one needs to retrieve all available permissions, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like superset_permissions_audit or superset_role_permissions_get. It provides context but lacks when-not-to-use or exclusionary guidance.

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