secrets_list_scopes

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that the scopes listed are those 'visible to the authenticated principal', which provides some authorization context. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or rate limits, which are not expected for a simple list operation.

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 a single sentence that is direct and to the point. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition, making it highly concise.

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 that the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and annotations are present, the description is fully sufficient. It names the resource and specifies the scope of visibility, which provides complete context for a simple list operation.

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?

The input schema has no parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Since there are no parameters, the description does not need to add parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. The score is baseline 4 as per guidelines.

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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'secret scopes', and the scope 'visible to the authenticated principal'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like secrets_create_scope, secrets_delete_scope, etc.

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 for listing secret scopes accessible to the user, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other secrets tools (e.g., secrets_list for secrets within a scope). No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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