secret_scanner__list_patterns

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 implies a non-destructive read, which is correct for a listing verb, but adds nothing about what the returned pattern set looks like (IDs, names, severities, regexes) or whether the list is static or configurable. For a trivial zero-parameter read this is adequate rather than rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Nothing could be trimmed without losing the resource under discussion.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and no parameter documentation, the description is the only source of information about the tool. It identifies the resource but says nothing about the shape or contents of the returned pattern list, which an agent would want before deciding to call it.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema-based baseline for parameter semantics is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify and nothing missing.

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 and resource: 'List all secret patterns that the scanner can detect'. An agent can tell this is a catalog-enumeration tool, distinct from scan_text/scan_file/scan_directory siblings. It does not differentiate itself from the dozens of other '*__list_patterns' tools in the registry, so it stops short of 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 gives no when-to-use condition, no prerequisite or ordering advice (e.g. call this first to see what the scanner covers before scanning), and no exclusions. Usage is only weakly implied by the phrase 'patterns that the scanner can detect'.

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