lc_preview_set_group_permissions

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It states 'Preview', implying a non-destructive, read-only operation, but does not confirm idempotency, side effects, or authorization needs. The return value is not described.

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 very concise at one sentence, but it lacks structural elements like parameter highlights or usage examples. While not verbose, it is under-specified and does not earn its brevity.

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 has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain how parameters affect the preview, what the user should expect, or any constraints.

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%, and the description adds no information about the three parameters. It does not explain what the permissions array should contain, the format of group_id, or the purpose of token_ttl_seconds.

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 uses a specific verb 'Preview' and resource 'replacing a group's permission list', clearly indicating the tool's function. It differentiates from other preview tools by specifying 'replacing a group's permission list', though it doesn't elaborate on the preview output.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies a dry-run before a potential commit action (e.g., lc_confirm_action), but this is not stated. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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