oauth_clients

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

The description uses 'Retrieves' indicating a read operation, but no annotations like readOnlyHint or destructiveHint are provided. It does not disclose permissions, rate limits, or other behavioral traits beyond the obvious listing functionality.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy.

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 output schema and no parameters, the description explains what is retrieved (OAuth clients with roles and divisions). It does not specify the return format or pagination, but for a simple list without parameters, this is 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?

The input schema has no parameters, so the description cannot add meaning beyond the schema. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter information because none exists.

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 the tool retrieves a list of all OAuth clients, including roles and divisions. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling 'oauth_client_usage' which focuses on usage.

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 mentions the tool is useful for auditing and managing OAuth clients, providing clear context. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the sibling tool 'oauth_client_usage' implies when not to use this one.

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