oauth2_clients_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does enumerate what fields are returned (name, client ID, client type, scopes, status, creation date), which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose pagination behavior, sorting, or anything about authorization requirements for listing OAuth2 clients.

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, concise sentence that communicates the purpose and the returned fields. Every element earns its place; no wasted words or redundant phrasing.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It states scope, purpose, and the specific fields returned. It doesn't address pagination or ordering, which could matter for a list endpoint, but for a simple listing tool the coverage is adequate.

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 there is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema states. The baseline of 4 applies since there are no parameters to document. The description appropriately lists the returned fields, adding value beyond the empty schema.

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+resource ('List all registered OAuth2 applications') with clear scope ('for the current organization'). While it's fairly specific, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like oauth2_clients_get or oauth2_clients_scopes, though the plural 'list' verb and 'all' scope implicitly differentiates it from the singular 'get' sibling.

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 clearly states the context ('current organization') but doesn't explicitly say when to use this versus oauth2_clients_get or oauth2_clients_scopes. The usage is implied by the verb 'list' indicating enumeration, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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