retrieve_secret

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only that it operates against 'your account' and returns 'attribute values', leaving open whether the secret payload itself is unmasked in the response — a meaningful omission for a secrets tool, though a lower bar applies given the annotations.

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 the endpoint path up front and no filler. There is mild redundancy between 'Get specific secret by id' and 'Get attributes values for a specific secret', but nothing that wastes meaningful space.

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 simple single-record read with full annotation coverage and full schema coverage, the essentials are present. However, with no output schema, the description should say what comes back — particularly whether the secret value is returned — and it does not.

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%, with both secretId and x-trace-id documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, range, or sourcing guidance for secretId beyond what the schema already says.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Get specific secret by id') plus the exact endpoint path GET /v1/secrets/{secretId}, so the agent knows this is a single-record fetch. It does not name or distinguish itself from siblings like retrieve_secret_list, update_secret, or delete_secret, so it falls 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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance is given. The singular 'specific secret' plus the {secretId} path implicitly signal 'use this for one secret, not for listing', but the agent must infer that versus retrieve_secret_list rather than being told.

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