av_put_secret

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects. It states the action (create/update) but does not explain whether existing fields are overwritten, merged, or rejected, nor any authentication or vault-creation requirements.

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 a single, focused sentence with no wasteful words. It is appropriately brief for the level of detail it provides.

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?

The tool has three required parameters including a nested object, and no annotations or output schema. The description fails to cover prerequisites, return values, or edge-case behavior, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's context.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description should clarify each parameter. It only mentions 'name + field map', leaving 'vault' and the full nature of 'fields' under-specified. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's property names.

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 uses a specific verb phrase 'Create or update' with a clear resource ('a secret') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like av_get_secret and av_list_secrets. It also clarifies the payload as 'name + field map', which aligns with 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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as av_rotate_secret or av_create_vault. There is no mention of prerequisites like the vault needing to exist or when update vs. create is applied.

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