tc_set_permissions

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

Although the annotation destructiveHint=true already flags destructive behavior, the description adds critical detail: 'Everything not listed in acl loses its explicit permission.' It also discloses the safety gate confirm=true, providing context beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded with purpose and safety guidance, then presents a terse list of arguments. While the Arg section repeats parameter names from the schema, it is justified given the schema lacks descriptions and is not overly verbose.

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 description is complete for a complex tool with 6 parameters and an output schema: it covers prerequisites, destructive semantics, parameter options, and provides an example return payload. An output schema exists, but the description still adds value by showing the response shape.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates fully by explaining every parameter inline, including acl's expected format ({"READ": [ids], ...}) and noting defaults for item_type and inheritance. This adds semantic meaning absent from the bare 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 opens with 'REPLACE the whole ACL of a folder or file (advanced)' providing a specific verb and resource, and explicitly contrasts with sibling tools tc_grant_permissions and tc_remove_permissions, making its unique purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly advises 'Prefer tc_grant_permissions / tc_remove_permissions, which merge safely,' offering a clear alternative and indicating when not to use this tool. It also states prerequisites (TC_ENABLE_WRITE=1 and confirm=true), giving concrete usage conditions.

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