Secret Store

Pull environment to a file

pull_env

Write an environment (or a subset of keys) straight to a file on the user's machine without the values passing through you. Returns a one-time shell command (curl or PowerShell) that downloads the export and saves it; the ticket works once and expires in 10 minutes. Requires secrets:read. Audited when issued and when redeemed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "environment": "<environment>"
    },
    "name": "pull_env"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file`	No	File name the command writes, in the current directory (default .env.local)	.env.local
`keys`	No	Only these keys (default: all)
`format`	No	File format	dotenv
`project`	Yes	Project slug or id
`environment`	Yes	Environment slug or id, e.g. development, preview or production

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`keys`	Yes
`ticket`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`pullUrl`	Yes
`expiresAt`	Yes	ISO 8601 timestamp
`environment`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say it is non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent and closed-world; the description adds far more: the file is written locally, the ticket is single-use and expires in 10 minutes, secrets:read scope is required, and issuance and redemption are both audited. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four tightly packed sentences: mechanism first, then return shape, then expiry, then permission/audit requirements. No filler and nothing important is buried at the end.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a five-parameter tool with a full schema, an output schema, and annotations, the description covers the non-obvious essentials: what is returned, that the agent never sees the values, ticket lifetime, required scope, and audit trail. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter (file, keys, format, project, environment) is already documented with defaults and examples. The description only echoes the 'subset of keys' idea and does not clarify format choices or key-limit behavior beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Write an environment (or a subset of keys) straight to a file') plus the mechanism ('Returns a one-time shell command'), which clearly separates it from direct secret-reading siblings like get_secret or list_secrets — the values never pass through the agent.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implies the usage context clearly: use this when the environment should land on the user's machine without the agent seeing values. It gives operational conditions (one-time ticket, 10-minute expiry, requires secrets:read), but never names an alternative tool or an explicit 'do not use this when' exclusion.

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

All Secret Store tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?