Get secret usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as what 'usage' data includes or any side effects. It does not contradict annotations.

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 short, consisting of two sentences. While it is concise, it is too brief and lacks substantive information beyond the title and a technical detail. It is not optimally structured for agent use.

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 simple input (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks context about what 'usage' means in the domain and how this tool relates to sibling secret tools, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand its role.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the only parameter 'path.id'. The meaning of 'id' is implied but not stated, leaving the agent without explicit semantics. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 states 'Get secret usage', which is a specific verb ('get') and resource ('secret usage'). This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from other secret tools by the 'usage' aspect, though it doesn't elaborate on what usage entails.

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 versus alternatives. It mentions 'Authorization class: board' but does not explain usage context or mention any alternatives, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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