List Proton Pass Items

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds value by disclosing prerequisites (passAccessToken + pass-cli installation) and clarifying that secret values are not returned. This goes beyond the annotation's safety profile.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Purpose is front-loaded, and all critical information (return type, scope, requirements) is included efficiently.

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 the presence of an output schema and high schema parameter coverage, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior: what it does, what it returns (summaries), and what it requires. No gaps for this simple list tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add new semantic information beyond the parameter descriptions already present in the schema. It restates the filtering purpose without additional depth.

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?

Clear verb 'List' with specific resource 'Proton Pass credentials/item summaries'. Description explicitly states what is returned (id, name, type, vault) and what is not (secret values), distinguishing it from siblings like pass_get and pass_search.

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?

Usage context is implied by describing the tool as a list operation returning summaries, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives (e.g., pass_get or pass_search) or when-not-to-use. No exclusions or prerequisites beyond what is stated.

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