get_object_permissions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It clarifies that only 'explicit' permissions are returned, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose whether inherited permissions are excluded, whether any special privileges are needed to run it, or the structure of the returned 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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the tool's function. It is concise and free of unnecessary wording, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, with a clear purpose and well-documented parameters. The description adequately conveys the core behavior, though it could be more complete by noting the absence of effective permission calculation or the exact list of permission types returned. Given the low complexity, this is sufficient.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters (name, schema, database), giving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond the tool's overall purpose, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a clear resource 'explicit permissions granted on a specific database object'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_database_roles and list_database_users, which focus on roles and users rather than object 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: when you need object-level permissions, this is the tool. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from alternatives such as querying system views via execute_query. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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