Inspect Credential

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description labels the resource as an 'access-key credential', which adds minor context, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as sensitive-data exposure, required permissions, or behavior for non-existent ids.

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?

One concise sentence with no filler. The key selection criterion ('by id') is placed prominently, and every word contributes to the tool's purpose.

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?

This is a simple single-required-parameter read operation, with an output schema available and annotations covering safety. The description, while brief, is fully sufficient for an agent to know what the tool does and when to invoke it.

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 input schema already documents all 4 parameters. The description's 'by id' wording reaffirms the role of the required credentialId but adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Inspect'), a specific resource ('Cloudeval access-key credential'), and a specific selection mechanism ('by id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like credentials_list and credentials_templates, which serve listing or templating purposes.

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 this tool should be used when you already have a credential id and need to inspect a specific credential. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to alternatives like credentials_list for enumeration, so usage guidance is left mostly to inference.

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