app_software_tokens_list

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

Adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: warns that token identifiers and customer cloud sites are exposed ('CREDENTIAL-ADJACENT'). Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences including a warning and spec link. Front-loaded with purpose. Could be more concise; the spec link is helpful but adds length.

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?

Covers purpose, return format, and sensitivity. Leaves gaps: no mention of pagination, error cases, or required permissions. With no output schema, the return format description helps but is incomplete regarding edge cases.

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 coverage is only 50% (appSoftwareId has no description). The description does not elaborate on appSoftwareId parameter. The token parameter is explained in schema but not mentioned in description. Fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'List API access tokens minted for this app-software' with specific verb+resource. Return format is given. Distinguishes from sibling 'app_software_token_create' which creates tokens. However, does not explicitly state it is a read-only operation (though annotations cover that).

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., app_software_token_create). No mention of prerequisites or conditions. The spec link provides reference but not usage context.

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