list_credentials

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds value by disclosing that sensitive fields are omitted from the response, which is beyond the schema. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, rate limits, or other operational traits.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence and adds essential context about data sensitivity and returned fields in subsequent sentences.

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 that an output schema exists (not shown but indicated) and all parameters have schema descriptions, the description effectively complements by explaining what is not returned. Minor gap: no explicit mention of pagination handling, though the cursor parameter is described in schema.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description does not add new semantics for the parameters. It repeats no parameter details, which is acceptable as the schema already provides sufficient information. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: listing all stored credentials. It specifies that sensitive data is not returned and only metadata (id, name, type, createdAt) is available, which distinguishes it from tools like get_credential (single credential details) or create_credential.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_credential for details). While implied by the name and description, the lack of direct context for sibling tools reduces clarity for an AI agent.

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