list_keyring_credentials

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description's added value is noting the return format (hostname and username per entry). This is beneficial, though it could be more explicit about what the list contains (only hosts with stored credentials).

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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the purpose, then provide usage guidance and return information. Every sentence contributes essential information without 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage context, output contents, and behavioral traits. It is fully adequate for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'credential_type', with enum and default. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 lists hosts with stored credentials in the OS keyring registry, specifying the verb 'list' and resource 'hosts with credentials'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ssh_discover and ssh_execute_command by explicitly recommending it as a preparatory step.

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 explicitly says to call this before ssh_discover or ssh_execute_command to check for stored credentials, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not mention situations where it should not be used or suggest alternatives, which would improve the score.

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