Get auth requests pending

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description contributes only the pending-only filter; it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or how pending is determined.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Brevity is appropriate for a narrow filtered-list tool, though the terseness borders on under-specification given the opaque parameters.

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 list with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and filter adequately. However, with three undocumented, untyped parameters and no mention of them, the definition is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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% and all three parameters (form, params, json_body) are untyped and undocumented, so the description must compensate — but it mentions no parameters at all. An agent has no way to know what to put in these fields from either source.

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 (List) and resource (auth requests) plus an explicit scope qualifier (only pending), which implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling vaultwarden_get_auth_requests that presumably returns all requests. It stops short of naming that sibling or describing what fields come back.

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 word 'only pending' implies this is the filtered variant of a broader list, but the description never names vaultwarden_get_auth_requests as the alternative or states when to prefer one over the other. Usage is inferable but not explicit.

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