openclaw_secrets_set

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. Explains internal call to config.patch, that writes are restart-free and visible to next run. Does not disclose if overwriting existing secrets is allowed.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose, parameters, and behavioral notes. No redundancy, each sentence adds value.

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 schema coverage and tool complexity, description covers usage and behavior well. Lacks mention of error conditions or overwrite behavior, but otherwise complete for agent understanding.

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 100%, description adds meaningful context: explains default scope, skill-scoped usage for scope parameter, and instance routing. Provides examples that go beyond 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 clearly specifies storing secrets in the gateway's config tree (e.g., 'Store an arbitrary secret ... in the gateway's config tree'). It distinguishes from siblings like openclaw_secrets_resolve and highlights the default scope and skill-scoped usage.

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 context on when to use default scope vs. override for skill-scoped secrets. Mentions that it writes to CONFIG tree, not secrets.resolve store. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives beyond the note about secrets.resolve.

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