renew-secret

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and adequately discloses key behaviors: it indicates mutation (renewing/changing TTL) and clarifies that omitting 'ttlHours' makes the secret permanent. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error handling, which are important for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded and concise with two sentences that directly address the tool's purpose and usage, with no wasted words or redundant information, making it efficient and easy to understand.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and usage but lacks completeness in areas like behavioral details (e.g., permissions, side effects) and output expectations, which are important given the tool's complexity and lack of structured support.

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 schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds marginal value by explaining the purpose of TTL changes and the effect of omitting 'ttlHours', but does not provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema offers.

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 specific action ('renew' or 'change TTL') and resource ('secret'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'create-secret', 'update-secret', and 'delete-secret' by focusing on expiration management rather than creation, general updates, or deletion.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool ('to reactivate expired secrets or extend expiration'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives like 'update-secret' for non-expiration changes, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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