list_passkeys

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries the rest. It adds genuinely useful behavioral context: the returned fields (state, type, associated user info) and that pagination/filtering are supported. No auth or rate-limit notes, but this goes meaningfully beyond the annotation.

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?

Three short sentences, with the core action front-loaded. The final sentence defining passkeys is mildly educational rather than operational, but it is brief and does not bury the main point.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields. Pagination and filtering are flagged, and the filter/order syntax lives in the schema, so an agent has enough to call it. Missing detail on result volume or defaults is minor.

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 skip, filter, order_by, and page_size are already fully documented including SCIM filter grammar and sort syntax. The description only restates that filtering and pagination exist, adding no syntax beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+scope: 'List all passkeys across the tenant.' An agent can distinguish it from delete_passkey or list_passkey_tags, though no sibling is named explicitly to sharpen the boundary.

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?

'Supports pagination and filtering' hints at how to use it, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. Usage is implied by the listing verb rather than stated.

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