users_get_permissions

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

The description discloses that results are cached for 10 minutes and includes app-specific permissions. With no annotations provided, this covers important behavioral traits, though it could mention error handling or authorization requirements.

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 concise, well-structured with bullet points for workflow tips and common use cases, and front-loads the main purpose. Every sentence contributes meaning without redundancy.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema, but the description adequately explains what is returned (all permissions, access levels, restrictions) and includes caching behavior. This is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema already has 100% coverage with a description for the required 'id' parameter. The description adds value by providing usage examples like { 'id': 123 }, aiding understanding beyond 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 'Get user permissions' and explains it returns all permissions assigned to a user including access levels and restrictions. This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like permission_sets_get.

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?

Workflow tips and common use cases provide context for when to use the tool (auditing, verifying permissions). However, it does not explicitly exclude scenarios or compare to alternatives, which would improve guidance.

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