Get user credentials

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate that. It adds valuable context by noting that $top is not supported server-side, which affects pagination behavior, and clarifies that the credentials are basic auth username/password pairs rather than OAuth tokens. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent avoid an unsupported 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 succinct: a single sentence stating the core purpose plus a short note about a limitation. It is front-loaded with the essential action and resource type, and the note is concise and relevant. No word is wasted, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 there is no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively. It fails to explain the meaning of the four parameters or hint at the response structure. The $top note is useful but does not cover pagination alternatives (e.g., skip). The tool's complexity is low, but the missing parameter semantics make the guidance incomplete.

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 0%, meaning the schema properties (skip, filter, select, orderby) have no descriptions. The tool description does not compensate at all—it mentions none of the parameters or their intended use. Without any explanation, the agent cannot correctly construct parameter values or understand what each one does, resulting in a critical gap.

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' and the specific resource 'deployed user credentials (basic auth username/password pairs)'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_oauth2_credentials and get_authorized_users by specifying the exact credential type, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool retrieves.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. While the note about $top not being supported is a usage constraint, it does not help the agent choose between get_user_credentials and get_oauth2_credentials or other credential-related tools. No explicit exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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