list_secrets_stores

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and scope, without mentioning pagination, result ordering, permissions, or what the response contains beyond what 'List' implies.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the action, resource, and scope with no filler or repetition. Every word earns its place.

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 low complexity — one required parameter and no output schema — the description is mostly adequate for invoking the tool. However, it lacks any detail on pagination, limits, or return shape, which leaves a minor but real gap for a list-type operation.

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 only parameter, account_id, is already fully documented in the schema as 'The account ID', and the description's 'for an account' aligns with it. With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds no new semantic detail, matching the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('secrets stores') with an account scope, clearly stating the core operation. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_secrets_store and list_secrets_store_secrets by naming the plural resource, though it does not explicitly call out those differences.

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 phrase 'for an account' implies account-level scoping, and the sibling list includes alternatives such as get_secrets_store and list_secrets_store_secrets, so an agent can infer when to use this tool. However, the description provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives.

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