list_client_side_tokens

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating this is a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains pagination behavior ('Results are paginated'), safety of exposing tokens client-side, environment distinctions (test_ vs. live_ tokens), and token status meanings (active vs. revoked). This enriches the agent's understanding without contradicting annotations.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses bullet points for token prefixes and statuses, which aids readability. However, some sentences could be more concise (e.g., 'The returned token field is the client-side token that needs to be provided when initializing Paddle.js' is slightly redundant). Overall, it efficiently conveys necessary information without excessive verbosity.

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 the tool's complexity (list operation with pagination and filtering), annotations (readOnlyHint), and schema coverage (100%), the description is quite complete. It explains key behaviors like pagination, token safety, and status meanings. The lack of an output schema is compensated by describing the returned token field and its implications. Minor gaps include not detailing the output structure beyond the token field.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters (after, orderBy, perPage, status). The description adds some semantic context: it recommends using maximum perPage (200), explains how to use 'after' for pagination, and clarifies status filtering. However, it does not provide significant additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, such as default values or usage examples for orderBy.

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's purpose: 'list client-side tokens in Paddle.' It specifies the resource (client-side tokens) and the action (list), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_client_side_token' (singular) and 'create_client_side_token' (creation). The description also explains what client-side tokens are used for (authenticating with Paddle.js), adding context beyond just the verb.

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 provides clear usage guidance: 'Use the maximum perPage by default (200) to ensure comprehensive results' and 'Filter client-side tokens by status as needed.' It also explains pagination with the 'after' parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_client_side_token' (for a single token) or other list tools, though the context of listing tokens is implied.

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