list_secrets_store_secrets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does communicate that this is a read-only listing operation and that only names are returned, which is useful. However, it does not mention pagination, ordering, permissions, or whether secret values are intentionally excluded beyond the 'names only' phrase.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and 'names only' efficiently sets output expectations.

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 two-parameter list operation with full schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no output schema and no annotations, details about the response shape, pagination, and authentication requirements are absent. The description tells what is listed but not fully how the result is returned.

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%: both account_id and store_id have basic descriptions. The tool description adds no further parameter semantics, so it does not exceed the baseline expected when the schema already documents all parameters.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('secrets in a secrets store'), and the scope ('names only'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_secrets_stores and get_secrets_store, which operate on stores rather than the secrets within them.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus related tools such as list_secrets_stores, get_secrets_store, or list_worker_secrets. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where a sibling would be more appropriate.

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