get_permission_level

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool 'Returns the current level (0-3) and its description,' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm that there are no side effects or special authorization requirements. The range disclosure is helpful, but more detail about the behavioral nature (e.g., no permissions needed) would strengthen it.

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 informative sentence in English, followed by a Chinese translation. While concise and front-loaded, the duplicate content in a second language is slightly redundant for an AI agent, but it does not detract significantly from clarity.

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, zero-parameter getter with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and return value. It does not explain the meaning of permission levels (e.g., what 0 vs 3 implies), but that is likely covered by the output schema. The description is adequate, though a note on typical use cases would improve completeness.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings, and the schema's empty properties are consistent. No parameter-related gaps exist.

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 identifies the exact resource 'current command execution permission level', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like set_permission_level. It also specifies the return value (level 0-3 and its description), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is preferable for checking current permissions before executing commands, nor does it contrast with set_permission_level or get_command_blacklist. The usage context is entirely implicit.

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