rundeck_get_key_metadata

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

The description clearly states that the tool does not return the secret value, which is a critical behavioral trait. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden, and it adequately discloses what is returned and what is not.

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 with an clarifying negation, front-loading the key information. It is concise and every part adds value.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description thoroughly explains purpose, return fields, and what is not returned. It is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 already provides a clear description for the 'path' parameter ('Full key path (e.g., 'keys/myapp/password')'), and the description adds no additional meaning. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 'Get' and the resource 'metadata for a stored key', enumerating specific fields (type, name, path) and explicitly noting what it does NOT return (the secret value). This distinguishes it from siblings like rundeck_list_keys and rundeck_create_key.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for retrieving metadata without the secret, but lacks direct comparisons to siblings like rundeck_get_key (which does not exist in sibling list) or rundeck_list_keys.

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