gitlab_list_trigger_tokens

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, if it's paginated, the response format, or any rate limits—critical gaps for a list operation.

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 a single, direct sentence with zero wasted words, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with the core purpose. It efficiently communicates the essential action without unnecessary elaboration.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a list operation. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., safety, pagination), response format, and usage context, leaving significant gaps despite the simple parameter schema.

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%, with the single parameter 'project_id' well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying tokens are scoped to a project, which is already clear from the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 action ('List') and resource ('pipeline trigger tokens'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'gitlab_get_trigger_token' (singular vs. plural) or specify scope beyond what the parameter implies, missing full sibling distinction.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose this over 'gitlab_get_trigger_token' (for a single token) or other list tools, nor does it specify prerequisites or contextual constraints for listing tokens.

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