iyke_secret_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: returns null for missing keys, falls back to legacy unscoped key with a deprecation log. It implies no destructive actions (read-only), which is consistent with the tool name.

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—four sentences that front-load the main purpose and then add necessary details. No redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return values (string or null) and fallback mechanics. It does not mention potential errors (e.g., invalid scope format), but it is sufficiently complete for a read tool with clear scope semantics.

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 must compensate. It thoroughly explains the 'scope' parameter with valid values and usage. However, the 'key' parameter, though required, is not elaborated beyond being a string; no format or constraints are given.

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 reads a secret from the vault, specifying the action (read) and resource (secret). It also differentiates from related sibling tools like iyke_secret_set or iyke_secret_delete by explicitly calling it a read operation.

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 provides detailed guidance on using the scope parameter: omitting it for active project, 'workspace' for shared secrets, and specific partition identifiers. It also explains fallback behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives like iyke_secret_list.

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