nexus_secret_scan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering safety traits. The description adds a key behavioral detail: 'Findings are redacted', which is not evident from annotations or schema. No contradiction exists, and the extra information is valuable for setting expectations.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately conveys purpose. It includes concrete examples and a critical behavior (redaction) without unnecessary verbosity. Every phrase 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 scanning tool, the description covers the core action and redaction behavior, and the schema documents paths. However, it omits output format or return value details, and lacks usage guidance. Given the absence of an output schema, some indication of what the tool returns would have improved completeness.

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 only 50% (paths has a description, limit does not). The description does not mention parameters at all, leaving limit's semantics ambiguous. This does not compensate for the partial schema coverage, and the description adds no parameter-related value.

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's function with a specific verb ('Scan') and resource ('files'), and specifies the target ('secrets') with concrete examples (AWS, GitHub, OpenAI, JWT, private keys). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexus_search and nexus_read_span, which serve different purposes.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where a different tool would be more appropriate. The description is purely functional without usage context.

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