PowerPlatform MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the optional filtering behavior but fails to disclose other critical behavioral traits such as error handling (e.g., behavior when roleId is invalid), whether results include inherited privileges, pagination behavior, or response format details.

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 a single, efficient sentence that is appropriately front-loaded with the core action and resource. It avoids redundancy with the title and maintains appropriate length, though it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 an output schema (so return values need not be described) and 100% input schema coverage, the description provides the minimum viable context for a retrieval tool. However, it lacks richness regarding the domain context (what these privileges represent) and operational nuances that would make it fully complete.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the parameters are already well-documented in the schema (including examples for accessRightFilter and environment). The description mentions the optional filters but does not add semantic value, syntax guidance, or usage patterns beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 the tool retrieves privileges for a specific security role and mentions the optional filtering capability. However, while it implies distinction from sibling 'get-security-roles' by specifying 'specific security role', it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or clarify when to use this versus querying all roles.

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 mentions optional filters ('optionally filtered by entity or access right') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites for usage, or scenarios where this would be inappropriate. The 'when-to-use' context is entirely absent.

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