manage_credentials

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the three distinct operations, specifies that 'store' requires an api_key parameter, and mentions security context ('securely in keychain'). However, it doesn't address potential side effects like what happens during 'delete' (irreversible removal) or error conditions.

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 perfectly structured with a clear opening sentence establishing context, followed by a bulleted list of actions with brief explanations. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant information, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, multiple operations) and no annotations, the description does well to explain the core functionality. With an output schema present, it doesn't need to describe return values. The main gap is not explaining the 'account_id' parameter's role, but overall it provides sufficient context for basic usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining the 'action' parameter's three possible values and their meanings, and explicitly stating that 'store' requires the 'api_key' parameter. It doesn't mention the 'account_id' parameter, leaving some gap, but provides substantial value beyond the bare schema.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('manage', 'show', 'store', 'remove') and resources ('New Relic credentials', 'keychain'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on credential management rather than monitoring, querying, or other New Relic operations.

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 explicitly provides usage guidance through the 'Actions' list, specifying when to use each action ('status' for checking, 'store' for saving with api_key requirement, 'delete' for removal). It clearly differentiates between the three distinct operations this tool performs.

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