sm_list_secrets

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

No annotations provided; description does not list any behavioral traits. For instance, it doesn't mention pagination, ordering, or error handling (e.g., what happens if instance_id is invalid). The 'limit' parameter is in schema but not explained.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. Could be improved by front-loading key details, but it is appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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 and 3 parameters, the description is too minimal. It lacks information about return format, pagination, and the effect of optional parameters. Sibling tools like ce_list_secrets may have more detail, but this description stands alone inadequately.

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 33% (only instance_id has description). Description adds no parameter details beyond the tool's purpose. The 'limit' and 'region' parameters are not mentioned or explained, so description fails to compensate for low schema 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?

Description clearly states verb 'list', resource 'secrets', and context 'Secrets Manager instance'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sm_create_secret, sm_get_secret, etc.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as sm_get_secret for a single secret or sm_list_secret_groups for groups. No conditional or exclusionary language.

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