probely_list_credentials

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

Given no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that sensitive values are not returned and specifies the URI format, which are key behavioral traits. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but for a list tool this is acceptable.

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 only four sentences, each providing essential information: purpose, missing sensitive values, return format, and proper usage. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary detail.

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?

While the description covers purpose and return format, it does not explain how to use the filtering parameters or handle pagination. Given the output schema exists, return values are partly covered, but behavioral details for parameters are missing, leaving gaps for effective use.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the four parameters (page, search, is_sensitive, length). The agent must infer their meaning from common conventions, which is risky. The description fails to add value for parameter usage.

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 starts with 'List credentials' which clearly states the action and resource. It differentiates from other credential tools by focusing on listing and returning URI format, which is distinct from creating, deleting, or updating credentials.

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 usage guidance on URI format and warns against template syntax, but does not explicitly compare when to use list vs get_credential or other credential operations. It implies use in authentication configuration but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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