scan_secrets_history

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses marking findings as 'active' or 'removed' and need for rotation, but lacks details on permissions, performance impact, or side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 are concise and front-loaded with the core action. No unnecessary words.

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?

Description explains the output classification (active/removed) but does not detail the output format beyond schema enum values. With no output schema, a bit more detail on return structure would improve completeness, but overall adequate.

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%; description adds no extra meaning to parameters beyond schema definitions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool scans git history for leaked secrets, including those later removed. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'scan_secrets' by specifying historical scope.

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?

Description implies this is for historical scanning vs current scanning but does not explicitly state when to use or alternatives. No exclusion criteria.

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