Create a secret

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

It goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that the value is write-only and never readable again through the API, recommending external storage, and warning that events have no defaults and pull_request must be explicitly included. These are critical behavioral details not captured by the raw annotation flags.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the purpose, the write-only warning, and the events/pull_request gotcha. The most important constraints are front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 complex 8-parameter create operation with an output schema, the description covers the non-obvious pitfalls that could cause data loss or invisible secrets. The remaining parameter details are fully covered by the 100%-documented schema, so nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the meaning of scope, value, and events, but mostly restates what the schema already documents. It adds no new per-parameter syntax beyond the schema's own rich descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'Creates a secret,' and adds the scoping notion 'at the chosen level.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_secret, update_secret, and delete_secret.

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 makes the tool's context clear: use it to create a secret, with important warnings about write-only values and required events. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as update_secret or delete_secret for subsequent changes, but the create verb makes the primary use case unambiguous.

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