list_token_permission_groups

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

Listing is an inherently read-only operation, and the word 'available' hints that the response is scoped to token-eligible permission groups. With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden, but it does not mention pagination, ordering, or permission prerequires; these are moderate gaps rather than severe omissions.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a one-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description names the resource and scope clearly enough for an agent to invoke it. It does not describe output formatting or edge cases, but those are reasonably inferrable from a list operation; the main missing element is an explicit nod to the closely related list_permission_groups tool.

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 only parameter, account_id, is fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The tool description adds token-permission context but does not provide additional parameter-level details beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('permission groups for API tokens'), with a qualifier that distinguishes it from the sibling list_permission_groups. An agent can immediately understand what this tool returns and that it is scoped to token permissions.

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 phrase 'for API tokens' implies when this tool should be used, especially compared to the sibling list_permission_groups. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or states when not to use this tool, so the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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