commands_get_guild_command_permissions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'ALL commands' scope and the return structure, which is useful but does not go beyond what is obvious or already covered by the output schema. No additional behavioral context such as rate limits or required permissions is provided.

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 extremely concise and well-structured with clear 'Purpose' and 'Returns' sections. Every sentence provides necessary information without any waste.

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 list tool with two required parameters and good annotations, the description is complete. It states the purpose and return shape, and the output schema is available for detailed structure. No critical information is missing for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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% with both parameters having meaningful descriptions ('Guild scope' and 'Bot/app application ID'). The tool description does not add any further detail about the parameters, so it does not exceed the baseline provided by 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?

The description clearly states the operation: 'List per-command permission overrides for ALL commands in a guild.' It uses a specific verb (List), identifies the resource (per-command permission overrides), and scopes it to all commands in a guild. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like commands_get_command_permissions (singular) or commands_edit_command_permissions.

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 by emphasizing 'ALL commands', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or references to other tools. The context is clear but not explicitly differentiated.

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