Secrets: delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description goes further with the actual blast radius: the encrypted value is gone permanently and any workflow referencing {{ $anythink.secrets.KEY }} breaks until the secret is recreated. That downstream-failure disclosure plus the user-confirmation instruction is exactly the extra context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then impact, then the alternative, then the safety note. No filler and each sentence carries distinct information.

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 single-parameter destructive delete with no output schema, the definition covers action, irreversibility, downstream effect, the sibling alternative, and a confirmation requirement. Nothing material is missing.

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 100% for the single `key` parameter, so the schema already documents it. The description only incidentally hints at key naming via the {{ $anythink.secrets.KEY }} template reference; it adds no format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a secret") and immediately disambiguates from the sibling secrets_update, which also modifies the same resource. An agent can tell which secrets tool to pick without opening any 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?

Explicitly names the alternative and the condition that selects it: "To change a value, use `secrets_update` instead." It also gives a precondition-style guideline — confirm with the user before running — so when-to-use and when-not-to-use are both covered.

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