tokens_list

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, signaling a safe read operation. The description adds that tokens are scoped to the authenticated principal, which is valuable beyond annotations. No contradictions or missing behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, perfectly concise, and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is necessary.

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 with no parameters, an output schema exists, and the description fully explains its purpose. No additional context is needed for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details.

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 it lists PAT tokens with the verb 'List', the resource 'PAT tokens', and the scope 'owned by the authenticated principal'. It distinguishes from sibling tokens_create, tokens_get_info, and tokens_revoke by focusing on listing all tokens rather than creating, getting details, or revoking.

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 implies usage for listing all PAT tokens but does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like tokens_get_info for a specific token or exclude use cases. Guidance is implied but not stated.

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