prufa_gremlin_saved_logins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly discloses sensitive behavior (returns decrypted passwords) and includes a critical security restraint. However, it does not describe behavior when no saved logins exist (e.g., returns empty list or error), which is a minor gap.

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 extremely concise: one sentence conveys purpose, sensitivity, scope, and usage instruction. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description specifies the return value as 'DECRYPTED email+password,' which is sufficient to understand the return content. It does not detail the exact structure (e.g., single object vs. array) or error handling, but given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate.

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 zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info; it correctly implies the tool requires no input.

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 returns decrypted credentials for previously used logins, with a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('DECRYPTED email+password'). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's for gremlin runs in the current workspace, contrasting with tools like prufa_set_flow_credentials that set rather than retrieve credentials.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'so a kickoff can reuse them' and provides a direct usage instruction: 'pass them straight into prufa_run_gremlin's credentials.' Also gives a clear negative guideline: 'Never print these values' and 'Only for the owning workspace,' leaving no ambiguity about safe handling.

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