pbs_acl_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It declares the tool is 'READ-ONLY', implying no side effects, and lists the return fields. While it could mention pagination or rate limits, the description adequately discloses the core behavioral trait for a simple listing tool.

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: one sentence for the core purpose, one for return fields, and two short sentences for alternatives and prerequisite. No wasted words, and it front-loads the key information.

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's simplicity (list ACL entries, 3 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, what it returns, related tools, and configuration requirement. No gaps.

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%, so each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema (e.g., does not explain how 'exact' works or that 'path' can be omitted). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 explicitly states the verb 'list', the resource 'PBS ACL entries', and enumerates the returned fields (path, roleid, ugid, ugid_type, propagate flag). It distinguishes itself from sibling mutation tools by prefacing 'READ-ONLY' and providing alternatives.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use pbs_acl_update to grant/revoke, or pbs_roles_list to see PBS's fixed set of built-in roles.' It also mentions the prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config', which aids selection.

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