pbs_permissions_get

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Declares READ-ONLY, describes return format (map of ACL path to map of privilege name to propagate-bit), and mentions PROXIMO_PBS_* config requirement. Missing auth or rate limit details, but sufficient for a read-only permissions 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?

Two concise sentences front-loaded with READ-ONLY and clear purpose. No fluff, every word adds value.

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 output schema exists (as per context signals), description explains return format, config requirement, and alternative tool. Complete for the tool's complexity and sibling context.

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 covers all 3 parameters (100% coverage). Description adds minor context (e.g., 'omit for every path'), but does not significantly enhance beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states it resolves effective (inherited+direct) privileges for a PBS user/token and distinguishes from pbs_acl_get which returns raw entries. The verb 'resolve' and resource 'privileges' are specific.

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?

Explicitly references pbs_acl_get as an alternative for raw entries, guiding when to use each. Does not state prerequisites or negative scenarios, but the READ-ONLY hint implies safe usage.

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