get_user_permissionRetrieve a specific user's permission details for a Google Tag Manager account. Provide the numeric account ID and permission ID to view the assigned access level.
Get one user's access to a Tag Manager account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account_id | Yes | Numeric Tag Manager account ID. | |
| permission_id | Yes | Numeric user permission ID. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get' clearly suggests a read-only operation, but it does not disclose auth requirements, not-found behavior, or whether the response is a single permission object. This is minimal but acceptable for a simple getter.
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 entire description is one focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and resource, making the tool's purpose immediately visible.
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 low complexity (two required parameters, no nested objects, full schema coverage, and an output schema present), the description plus schema is sufficient for an agent to invoke this tool correctly. It lacks explicit sibling comparison, but nothing essential is missing for the call itself.
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% and both parameters are already documented as numeric IDs, so the description does not need to compensate. The phrase 'one user's access' adds context but no new parameter-level meaning.
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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one user's access to a Tag Manager account'), clearly distinguishing it from list_user_permissions and from create/update/delete permission tools. It is unambiguous about scope: a single user's access rather than all permissions.
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 phrase 'one user's access' implies this is for retrieving a single permission, and the sibling list makes alternatives apparent. However, the description does not explicitly state when to choose this over list_user_permissions, nor does it mention any preconditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.