List User Credentials (Security Material)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It explicitly states that only names/metadata are returned and no secrets are included, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any required permissions, or other potential behaviors, leaving gaps.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and directly states the key scoping detail (no secrets). Every word contributes value.

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 list tool with one optional parameter, the description is reasonably complete. It defines the output scope (names/metadata only) and the resource scope (deployed artifacts). The missing parameter explanation and usage context prevent a higher score.

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 description does not mention the 'top' parameter at all. The schema provides type, default, min, and max, but with 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate. It fails to explain that 'top' is a limit for the number of returned items.

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 (deployed User Credential security artifacts), and the scope (names/metadata only, no secrets). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_oauth2_client_credentials and list_keystore_entries.

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 instead of alternatives such as list_oauth2_client_credentials or list_deployed_artifacts. It does not mention any exclusions or preferred contexts.

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