get_entity_permissions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds one useful scoping trait — that only 'direct' permissions are returned, implying inherited permissions are excluded — but does not state the return shape, pagination, or whether an entity with no explicit grants returns empty.

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 efficient sentence with the core action and return values front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably too terse for the tool's ambiguity with siblings, but nothing in it is wasted.

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 simple read-only getter with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is close to adequate. The main missing piece is disambiguation from get_entity_access/update_entity_permissions and any detail on the entityId parameter, leaving the agent under-informed at selection time.

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 50%: entityType carries its enum description in the schema, but entityId is undocumented in both schema and description. The description says only 'of an entity' and gives no hint about entityId format (numeric vs. string ID) or how it pairs with entityType, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (Get) and resource (entity permissions) and even enumerates the permission levels returned (READ/GRANT/WRITE). However, it does not distinguish itself from the very similar sibling get_entity_access (nor from update_entity_permissions), so an agent must guess between them.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as get_entity_access or update_entity_permissions. The agent is given no criteria for choosing this tool over its near-duplicate siblings.

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