JWT Token Info

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only says information is shown. It does not clarify that this is a read-only operation, what information is returned, or how the optional token parameter interacts with the 'current' token. No side effects or failure modes are described.

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, short sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the verb and clearly states the purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain what information is returned and how the optional token parameter affects behavior. It fails to do either, leaving significant gaps that prevent an agent from fully understanding the tool's output and usage.

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 fully documents the single optional 'token' parameter with a clear description ('Token zum Analysieren (optional)'), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as how the parameter modifies the 'current' token behavior, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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 'Zeigt Informationen zum aktuellen JWT Token' clearly states the tool shows information about a JWT token, using a specific verb ('zeigt') and resource ('JWT Token'). It is concise and understandable, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like jwt_validate, which may also examine tokens.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as jwt_validate or jwt_set_token. The description does not mention exclusions, preferred scenarios, or how it relates to other JWT tools, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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