Check a credential request

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by guaranteeing that no credential material is ever returned. This safety guarantee is a key trait not covered by annotations, though it does not disclose blocking behavior or error handling.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and add a critical safety note. There is no unnecessary detail or verbosity.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and a read-only annotation, but the description omits key behavioral details such as the optional blocking behavior via wait_seconds and what the response actually contains (e.g., status list, error scenarios). Without an output schema, the description should describe the return value format more fully.

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 provides no explanation of the parameters. request_id is self-explanatory from its name, but wait_seconds is already described in the schema. With only 50% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the missing request_id semantics or clarify how to obtain such an ID.

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 the status of a credential request and explicitly mentions it never returns credential material. This distinguishes it from siblings like secret.cancel or secret.store, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for checking status but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. There is no mention of 'use when you need to check status' or exclusions like 'do not use to cancel requests'.

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