secrets_put_acl

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation behavior is expected. Description adds 'Create or overwrite' but doesn't disclose any side effects, idempotency, or consequences like overwriting existing ACLs without warning. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose without any redundancy.

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 an output schema exists (not shown), return values don't need explanation. However, the description omits context such as the requirement that the secret scope must exist, or that this action essentially sets an ACL (not just creates). Still minimally 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 descriptions already cover all three parameters (scope, principal, permission) including the allowed values for permission. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Create or overwrite') and the resource ('ACL on a secret scope'). Among sibling tools like secrets_get_acl, secrets_delete_acl, etc., this tool is distinctly for putting (creating/overwriting) an ACL.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like SecretsGetAcl (to read) or SecretsDeleteAcl (to remove). The description does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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