list_secrets

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions the optional filter and that it lists paths (not contents), but does not state if the operation is read-only (implied), how results are ordered or truncated, or whether it works with nested prefix hierarchies. The behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource, and includes the optional filter without any extraneous words. No wasted content.

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 the tool is simple (1 optional parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description adequately covers the main purpose. However, it lacks details on return format (flat list vs. tree), error states (e.g., no such prefix), and performance considerations (e.g., large stores). It is minimally complete but not comprehensive.

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 parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds the context that the prefix is a 'folder prefix' rather than a flat tag, which adds slight value over the schema's description. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('secret paths in the gopass store'), and includes the optional filtering capability ('optionally filtered by folder prefix'), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_secret and search_secrets.

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 the tool is for listing secrets, but does not explicitly say when to use this versus search_secrets (which might filter by content) or get_secret (which retrieves a single secret). No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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