list_secrets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses useful traits: default limit, cursor pagination, return shape, and automatic object-store storage with an object ID. It does not mention permission requirements or rate limits, but it adds substantial context beyond the schema.

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 first sentence is front-loaded and clear, but the description becomes repetitive around output storage and object IDs, repeating the same object-store usage guidance twice. The docstring formatting and extra return/object-store detail make it longer than needed for a two-parameter list tool.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, but the description explains the return preview and object-store reference model well. It omits permission/auth context and mentions workspace scoping without a corresponding schema parameter, leaving a minor gap for an agent assessing whether and how to scope the call.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents both parameters: 'limit' as the maximum number of secrets with a default of 10, and 'after' as the cursor for the next page. It could add cursor format details, but the core semantics are covered.

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 states a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('secrets') and defines the scope as the user's deepset organization or a specific workspace. It also distinguishes the listing operation from retrieving individual secrets, so an agent can tell it apart from get_secret without opening the 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?

It explicitly says the tool is useful for getting an overview of all secrets before retrieving specific ones, which gives clear usage context. It does not name the sibling get_secret directly or state when-not to use this tool, which keeps it from a 5.

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