secret_list

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

Even though annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, the description adds valuable context: results never include secret data, only metadata, and a swarm manager is required. This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies privacy and prerequisite behaviors.

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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes necessary details (filter keys, args, returns) without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place.

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 list tool, the description covers the operation, prerequisites, safety characteristics, filter options, and return type. No output schema exists, but the return format is described. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema only defines 'filters' as an object with no description, but the description explains its purpose ('Narrow the list; omit to return every secret') and lists valid filter keys. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states the tool 'List swarm secrets' metadata' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from secret_inspect by emphasizing metadata-only results. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

It provides context by mentioning 'requires a swarm manager' and compares behavior with secret_inspect, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. The guidance is clear but not fully explicit.

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