discord_get_channel_permissions

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: it discloses the exact structure of results (per role and per member, allowed and denied flags) and the comprehensive 'every permission overwrite' scope. This is useful context that annotations alone do not provide.

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 compact sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded first, the read-only property is stated briefly, and the alternative routing is in the second sentence. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema present, this description is complete. It covers scope, result granularity, safety, and the main alternative tool. Nothing that an agent needs to select or invoke this correctly is missing.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for channel_id, including its snowflake pattern and purpose. The description only refers to 'a channel' generically, so it adds little beyond the schema. A baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already carries the parameter documentation burden.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('every permission overwrite on a channel'), and clearly explains the granularity: per role and per member, with allowed and denied flags. It differentiates itself from discord_audit_permissions by explicitly naming that sibling, so an agent can distinguish the tools.

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?

It explicitly provides the alternative tool ('discord_audit_permissions') and the condition that should trigger its use ('server-wide report across all channels'). This gives clear routing guidance without needing to infer from tool names.

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