list_oauth_applications

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds only the definition of OAuth applications, not any additional behavioral context such as pagination behavior, sorting, or filtering semantics beyond what the schema provides. It does not contradict the 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that is easy to parse and contains no filler. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and adds a clarifying definition without waste.

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 list tool with read-only annotations and well-documented parameters, the description is largely complete. It states the tool lists OAuth applications, which implies the return content. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit mention of default limit or result behavior, but the schema's limit parameter covers the default.

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% for both parameters (limit, query), so the schema already documents their meaning. The description does not add any extra parameter-specific guidance, such as accepted formats or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the load.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('OAuth application registry entries'), with a helpful parenthetical defining what those are ('client applications that can authenticate'). This distinguishes it from the many sibling list tools by specifying a unique resource type.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any context such as 'Use this to view registered OAuth clients' or exclude other tools. The intended usage is only implied by the action 'List', which is insufficient for a tool in a large catalog.

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