Store a secret

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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the annotations: encryption happens locally, Slidingbox never sees plaintext or key, the returned token carries both pointer and decryption key, and the first read delivers and destroys the secret. This gives the agent a strong mental model of side effects and security properties.

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?

Four tight sentences front-load the action, then explain the returned token, the consumption workflow, and the security guarantee. Every sentence adds necessary context with no repetition or filler.

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 tool has no output schema, the description fully explains what is returned (a single token) and what that token means. Combined with the rich schema and annotations, an agent has everything it needs to invoke the tool correctly and understand downstream behavior.

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 100%, so the parameter semantics baseline is 3. The description reinforces that 'text' is encrypted before leaving the machine, but that information already appears in the schema field description. It adds no extra meaning for the parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Encrypt a secret locally and store the ciphertext') and names the resource (Slidingbox), making the core operation unmistakable. It also clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by explaining the unique token-and-destruction model, which retrieval and verification tools would not have.

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 gives clear context for use: store a secret, get a token, and hand that token to the intended reader. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'when not to use,' but the intended workflow is obvious from 'Hand that token to whoever should read it' and the sibling names.

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