Delete a secret

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and idempotent, but the description adds meaningful consequences: pipelines may fail or keep running with an empty value, and a two-step confirmation flow is required. This goes beyond the structured hints without contradicting them.

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 deliver the action, the impact, and the process clue with no unnecessary words. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 destructive two-step tool, the description covers the key behavioral consequences and signals the confirmation workflow. Combined with complete schema documentation and annotations, the agent has enough context to invoke it correctly, though the exact first-and-second-call sequence is left implicit.

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 parameters are already well documented. The description's 'Two-step' hint reinforces the purpose of confirm_token but does not add new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes a secret') and clearly conveys the destructive effect on pipelines. The operation is unambiguous, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like update_secret or create_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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_secret, create_secret, or update_secret. The 'Two-step' note is about the calling procedure, not about selecting the right tool for a situation.

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