get_credentials

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does state the tool retrieves three named credential fields, implying a read operation. It does not disclose whether any permissions are required, whether the secret is the current active secret, or how errors surface. That is a meaningful gap for a no-annotation tool.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler; the core action and return fields are front-loaded. The second sentence adds actionable parameter guidance, though it largely repeats schema content.

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 getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately names the returned values and lists all required parameters. It omits any note that secrets are sensitive or that rotation exists elsewhere (rotate_credentials), and it gives no error/availability context, so it is minimally complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'test' or 'live' and 'Requires orgId' only restates what the schema already documents via enum and property descriptions; it adds no new semantic information.

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 verb 'Get' plus resource 'credentials for an AgeKey application' is specific, and enumerating the returned fields (App ID, Secret, Authority URL) makes the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_application or rotate_credentials, so it stops short of a 5.

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 tells the caller to specify 'test' or 'live' and that orgId is required, which gives usable context for invoking. It does not state when this tool is preferred over rotate_credentials or list_applications, nor does it give any exclusions.

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