graph_explain_permissions

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond its explanatory purpose. It is a stateless knowledge tool, so side effects are not expected, but the description lacks details like whether it makes network calls or returns cached data.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key topic (permissions) and enumerates subtopics. No wasted words.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the main topics (delegated vs application, app registration, least-privilege) and is consistent with sibling explanation tools.

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 input schema has no parameters, and the description covers the purpose fully. Baseline of 4 applies as no parameters require additional semantics.

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 clearly states it explains Microsoft Graph permission types, including delegated vs application, app registration, and least-privilege best practices. It distinguishes itself from siblings like graph_explain_pagination and graph_explain_throttling by focusing specifically on 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 description implies usage for understanding permission concepts, but does not explicitly state when to use this over other explanation tools like graph_explain_odata. However, the topic is sufficiently distinct from siblings, making the context clear.

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