secrets_list_secrets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the exclusion of secrets scheduled for deletion but omits important traits like pagination, sorting, rate limits, or permission requirements. The output schema covers return structure, but behavioral context is insufficient for safe autonomous use.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no waste. Every word adds value, perfectly sized for quick comprehension.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are covered. However, for a list tool, missing details like pagination limits, default behavior when no filters are provided, or ordering leave gaps. The description is adequate for a simple list but not fully comprehensive given the 3 optional parameters.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., region defaults, optional name/tags filtering). It does not elaborate on parameter formats or constraints.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'secrets', with scope 'in a region'. It adds a critical filter: 'Only secrets that are not scheduled for deletion are returned', which distinguishes it from potentially similar list-secret-version tools and provides a specific behavioral guarantee.

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 listing active secrets in a region but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others (e.g., secrets_list_secret_versions) or include any constraints like required permissions. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving guidance implicit.

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