get_secret

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses a critical behavior—returning a reference ID instead of the raw secret—and mentions expiry/TTL, which is essential given the tool name. It does not cover permissions, error handling, or side effects, but the key behavior is transparent.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary behavior and return value. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or extraneous text.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must explain return values; it does so by stating a reference ID and expiry time. It covers the essential behavior and TTL mechanism, though it does not detail return structure or error cases. The required parameters are documented in the schema, so the description is adequately complete for invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions TTL period, aligning with the schema, but adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the property descriptions already provide.

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 uses a specific verb ('issues') and resource ('short-lived secret reference'), clearly stating the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly noting it returns a reference ID rather than the raw secret, which differentiates it from tools like resolve_secret.

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 context by explaining that the reference can be used to retrieve the actual secret within the TTL, suggesting a companion tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate scenario.

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