list_plex_oauth_servers

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the HTTP endpoint—no mention of authentication, response format, or side effects. Since annotations carry the burden, a 3 is appropriate; it doesn't contradict annotations.

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 very short, but it redundantly repeats the endpoint twice ('GET plex/oauth/servers' and 'GET /api/plex/oauth/servers'). While it's not verbose, the repetition is unnecessary and could be condensed to a single statement, making it slightly less efficient.

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?

Because the tool has zero parameters and an output schema exists, the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, it also lacks any statement about what 'servers' refers to (e.g., available Plex servers for OAuth authorization) or when this response is relevant, leaving a minor gap in an agent's understanding.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is irrelevant. Per the guidelines, a baseline of 4 applies to zero-parameter tools, and the description doesn't need to explain parameters. No further semantics are required.

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 states a specific verb (GET) and a resource (plex/oauth/servers), which makes the purpose clear enough for an agent to know it retrieves data about Plex OAuth servers. It does not, however, explain what 'servers' refers to or what the response contains, which would help differentiate it from sibling tools like list_plex_oauth_libraries.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios that would favor this over other list_plex_oauth_* tools or general list tools. An agent must infer from the name alone.

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