list_tokens

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one genuinely useful behavioral trait: the result ordering (v2 newest first, then v1). However it says nothing about permissions, whether the list is exhaustive or paginated, or what a token record contains.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than tight concision.

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?

A list tool with no annotations and no output schema needs the description to cover pagination, defaults, and result shape; it covers only ordering. An agent still cannot determine how much of the token set it will receive.

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 0% and the single parameter (limit, 1-50) is never mentioned in the description. The bound of 50 and the default page size are left entirely unexplained, so an agent cannot tell whether omitting limit returns everything or a truncated default.

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 (List) and resource (AgentPad tokens) and adds a distinguishing scope detail: v2 tokens come newest first, then v1. An agent can tell this is a bulk enumeration tool rather than a single-token fetch like get_token, though the description never names that sibling explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, no mention of when to prefer get_token or the buy/quote tools. The word 'List' implies enumeration, but the agent must infer the use case entirely.

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