sops_add_secrets

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it decrypts, merges, re-encrypts, preserves existing values and metadata, rejects duplicate keys, and supports multiple source types. This is comprehensive, though it could mention atomicity or error handling for missing keys.

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?

Three well-structured sentences; first sentence immediately states purpose, second explains the process and constraints, third lists support and requirements. No redundant or extraneous information. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Covers workflow, prerequisites, and constraints well. However, it does not describe the return value (likely the updated encrypted content) or specify what happens on failure. Given no output schema, a brief mention of the output would make it more complete. Sibling tools exist but are not referenced for differentiation.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already thoroughly describes each parameter. The description adds workflow context (decrypt, merge, re-encrypt) but does not enhance parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Explicitly states 'Add new secrets to an existing SOPS-encrypted file' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like sops_create_secrets (which likely creates a new file) and sops_delete_secrets. The merge-and-preserve behavior further clarifies its unique role.

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?

Provides prerequisite (SOPS_AGE_KEY env var) but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sops_create_secrets or sops_update_external. The description implies usage by stating it works on existing files, but a direct comparison or when-to-use/when-not-to-use would improve clarity.

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