list_site_permissions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it adds nothing beyond the name: it does not say whether inherited permissions are included, whether results are paginated, what a 'permission' entry contains, or whether elevated/admin rights are required. 'List' implies a safe read, but that is the only behavioral signal.

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?

A single short sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification for a tool whose return shape is undocumented.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema the description should say what the returned permissions look like (member/principal and role/level) so an agent can use the results. As written, an agent knows what to pass in but not what comes back.

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?

Only one parameter (site_id) exists and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it fully; this is the baseline case. The description adds nothing about the site_id format (GUID vs. hostname/path) or how to obtain it, so no credit above baseline.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('permissions on a SharePoint site'), which cleanly separates it from the mutating siblings add_site_permission and remove_site_permission. It does not explicitly name any sibling, but the read-only listing purpose is unambiguous.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as get_site or list_site_lists, nor any prerequisite (e.g., that the caller must have permission-enumeration rights on the site). Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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