List OAuth Grants

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that grants can be active or revoked, explains the revoked_at field, and states what each grant includes (client name, scopes, creation date). It does not cover rate limits or auth requirements, but for a read operation, this is good transparency.

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 two substantive sentences plus a colloquial hint. It is fairly concise, though the third sentence ('Don't bother...') could be considered unnecessary or better placed elsewhere. Overall, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description explains the return content (client name, scopes, creation date) and the revocation indicator. It mentions pagination parameters but doesn't elaborate beyond the schema. For a list tool, this is reasonably complete.

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 the schema already documents pagination parameters. The description adds context about the list's contents but does not add new meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool lists OAuth grants for the team, specifying it returns both active and revoked grants. It uses specific language ('List OAuth grants for the team') and distinguishes from the sibling revoke-oauth-grant.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is a hint ('Don't bother telling the user the IDs unless they ask for them'), but no mention of when listing is appropriate or when to use other tools like revoke-oauth-grant.

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