vault_entry_get

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

Given no annotations, the description fully discloses critical behavior: the secret is NEVER returned to the agent, processed server-side, and burned after reading. It also provides a directive to not store or reference the secret, ensuring transparency about side effects.

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 two sentences plus a directive, all relevant and front-loaded with the main action. It is efficient but could be slightly more streamlined without losing clarity.

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?

The core behavior, burn directive, and no-return policy are well covered. However, the optional command execution is mentioned but not explained how to specify the command (no param for it in schema), leaving a gap for the agent.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters have descriptions. The description adds only minor context ('from vault_entries_list' and 'Be specific' for purpose), which does not significantly enhance meaning beyond the schema.

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 'retrieve', the resource 'vault secret', and key details about the burn directive and optional command execution. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vault_entries_list (list only) and vault_exec (execute command separately).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like vault_entry_inject_env or vault_exec. It mentions 'use it for the stated task only' but provides no when-not guidance or comparison with siblings.

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