credentials_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states that the tool does NOT return usernames or passwords, which is a key behavioral trait and adds clarity beyond a generic 'list' action. It also implies a read-only operation through 'List'. While it doesn't detail return format or error handling, it sufficiently discloses the non-sensitive nature of the output.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action ('List') and the resource ('configured credential URL patterns/titles'). Every word adds value, and the exclusion of sensitive data is a concise, important qualifier. No fluff or repetition.

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 parameterless list tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It specifies what is returned (URL patterns/titles) and what is excluded (usernames/passwords). The existence of an output schema covers the return structure, so no further detail is necessary. The low complexity makes this sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics because there are none. It correctly focuses on what the tool returns rather than inputs.

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 tool lists configured credential URL patterns/titles, using a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly excludes usernames and passwords, distinguishing it from potential credential-related tools. This makes its purpose unambiguous and distinct from siblings like credentials_check or credentials_save.

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 implies usage: if you need to list credential URL patterns/titles, use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide conditions for when not to use it, especially given the existence of a similar sibling 'credentials_titles'. The exclusion of usernames/passwords hints that other tools handle those, but it's left to inference.

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