betadrop_token_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that only 'active' tokens are listed and scopes results to the 'current account', which are meaningful behavioral filters. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, output format, or any potential side effects beyond the implicit read-only nature of 'List'.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It contains no filler, repetition, or unnecessary explanation, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The tool is simple: no parameters, no output schema, no annotations. The description tells the agent what will happen - list active CLI tokens for the current account - which is sufficient to invoke the tool. It could mention that an authenticated session is required, but 'current account' strongly implies this, and the operation is a straightforward read.

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 is empty, and the schema description coverage is 100% by definition. With zero parameters, the description does not need to add parameter-level detail. This matches the zero-parameter baseline of 4.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('active CLI tokens'), and a scope ('current account'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like betadrop_token_create and betadrop_token_delete, which mutate tokens, and from betadrop_whoami, which returns account identity.

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 context: call this tool whenever you need to enumerate active CLI tokens for the current account. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the sibling tool names make the differentiation intuitive. It just lacks explicit 'use X instead' guidance.

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