guardrails_scan_secrets

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only mentions costing 1 TNC and detection, but omits whether the tool is read-only, error handling, or side effects. The name implies scanning, but explicit statements are missing.

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, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, and the cost detail is efficiently included.

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?

Output schema exists but is not provided. The description is minimal; it covers purpose and cost but lacks context on output format, error scenarios, or performance. Adequate for a simple one-parameter tool but could be more informative.

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%. The parameter 'text' is only described as 'text/code' in the description, adding minimal extra meaning. No details on format, constraints, or how input is processed.

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 tool detects exposed API keys, tokens, and passwords in text/code, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like guardrails_scan_injection and guardrails_scan_pii by focusing on secrets.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list hints at different scan types, but the description does not specify selection criteria or when not to use it.

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