perm_overview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. Words like 'Get' and 'Shows' imply a read-only query, and 'effective' plus 'their sources' hints that inherited/group permissions are resolved rather than raw. That is genuine behavioral value, but it says nothing about auth requirements, output shape, or cost.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with no padding. The second sentence usefully clarifies that sources are included, though it slightly overlaps 'overview' in the first.

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 read-only query tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what the tool produces at a high level (permissions plus their sources) but gives no hint of the response structure an agent would need to consume. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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 coverage is 100% with only two, clearly named numeric parameters (client_db_id, channel_id), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates that a client and channel scope the query, adding no format or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Get the effective permission overview for a client in a specific channel.' The 'effective' qualifier and 'their sources' give it real specificity. However, it does not differentiate from nearby siblings like perm_list, client_perm, channel_perm, or perm_find, so an agent still needs to guess which resolves the same need.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance. With siblings such as perm_list, client_perm, channel_perm, and perm_find in the toolset, ambiguity is high and the description does nothing to route the agent. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'effective permission overview for a client in a specific channel.'

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