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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds that the full record is returned and where the required ID comes from, but says nothing about auth context, failure modes for invalid/foreign IDs, or rate limiting. Given the low bar set by the annotations, a 3 is appropriate rather than higher.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by return behavior and then routing guidance. No filler or restated field names.

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 one-parameter read with full annotations and an output schema, the description covers everything the agent needs: what it returns, the required input, and how it differs from the list tool. Return-value details are legitimately delegated to the output 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% for the single `id` parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description goes slightly beyond the schema by disclosing the provenance of the ID (obtained from `list_unified_secretsmanagers`), which helps the agent source a valid value rather than guess.

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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieve') plus resource ('a single secretsmanager by its ID') and scope ('from the connected account'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the list sibling. An agent can identify what this does without opening the schema.

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?

Gives both the precondition ('Requires `id` (obtained from `list_unified_secretsmanagers`)') and the selection rule ('Use when you already have the ID; to search or list secretsmanagers, use `list_unified_secretsmanagers`'). The alternative tool is named and the condition that selects it is explicit.

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