Retrieve the rights associated with your BeezUP store to manage permissions and configuration.
Get store's rights
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "GetRights"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states that the tool gets store rights, but does not mention whether it is read-only, what happens to data, authentication requirements, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.
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 with no wasted words. However, it is too brief to be fully informative, which slightly reduces the score. It is front-loaded but lacks structure like bullet points or sections.
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 absence of input parameters and output schema, the description should explain the tool's return value or purpose more thoroughly. 'Get store's rights' is too vague; an agent would not know what the response contains or if the tool is safe to invoke. More context is needed for completeness.
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?
There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, which already documents no parameters. Since there are no parameters to describe, this dimension is adequately handled.
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 'Get store's rights' clearly identifies the verb (Get) and the resource (store's rights). It distinguishes from sibling tools like GetStore or GetUserAccountInfo by specifying 'rights'. However, 'rights' is somewhat ambiguous; it could refer to permissions or access levels, which slightly reduces clarity.
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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it specify any prerequisites or context. Among many sibling tools with similar patterns, an agent would have no guidance on choosing this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.