extract_devin_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the scope is local credentials, which is meaningful context for an extraction tool, but it says nothing about side effects, permissions, whether it writes anything, whether the credential is returned or persisted, or any security considerations.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, with the parenthetical kept brief. It is efficient, though the cross-repo alignment note adds little value for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum say what comes back (a credential string) and any precondition such as a local Devin/Windsurf login existing. Neither is stated, leaving the agent unsure of the return value and failure conditions.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. Nothing in the description misleads about inputs.

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?

States a specific verb (提取/extract) and resource (本地 Devin / Windsurf 登录凭证), so an agent immediately knows this pulls local credentials. It is easily distinguished from the siblings devin_web_search and devin_web_fetch, which are unrelated web operations, though it does not explicitly name those siblings.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist. The parenthetical reference to fast-context-mcp's extract_windsurf_key is an implementation note, not usage guidance, and no prerequisites (e.g. that a local Devin/Windsurf install must exist) are given.

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