list_storage_plugins

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

With no annotations provided, the description partially carries the transparency burden. It discloses a notable behavior—secrets are redacted—which adds value. However, it doesn't mention other important aspects like whether the list is read-only, whether plugin types are filtered, or performance considerations, leaving gaps in behavioral disclosure.

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 sentence that is direct and front-loaded. It states the core function first and adds one piece of important context (redaction) without any filler. Every word 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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description captures the essential purpose and the key redaction behavior. It could be enriched with what 'storage plugin configurations' entails or how the list is scoped, but given the low complexity and output schema availability, it is adequately complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description need not explain parameter meanings. The schema coverage is 100% (vacuously), and the description adds the redaction context, which is relevant to interpreting output. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets that standard.

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 action ('List') and resource ('storage plugin configurations'), making its purpose specific and distinct from sibling list tools like list_tables and list_profiles. It names the resource type unambiguously, eliminating confusion about what it operates on.

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 implies usage (use when you need storage plugin configurations) but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. It doesn't reference sibling tools or clarify boundary conditions, so context is inferred rather than explicit.

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