decode_jwt

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

No annotations provided, but the description covers key behavioral traits: it decodes without signature validation and returns three components. Missing details on error handling or token format, but acceptable for a simple tool.

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?

Three concise sentences with no redundant information. Front-loaded with core action and constraints.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it does and what it returns. Could mention error cases, but overall adequate.

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 0%. The description does not elaborate on the 'token' parameter beyond its name, missing the opportunity to specify expected format or constraints (e.g., 'a valid JWT string'). Minimal value added over the parameter name.

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?

Description clearly states the tool decodes a JWT without signature validation and returns header, payload, and metadata. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like validate_jwt which perform validation.

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?

Indicates it is useful for quick inspection, implying use cases. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use, the sibling validate_jwt provides an alternative for validation, making the intended use clear.

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