scan_secrets

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

The description portrays a read-only scanning operation, but the annotation destructiveHint is true, indicating potential destructive side effects. This contradiction is not addressed. The description fails to disclose any behavioral traits beyond the surface action, especially given annotations do not fully align.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action and includes specific examples of secrets scanned, making it efficient and informative.

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?

Does not describe the return format or structure of findings. Without an output schema, the agent lacks information on how to interpret results (e.g., list of matches, locations, severities). The reference to '20+ patterns' is insufficient.

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% with a clear description of the 'path' parameter as 'Absolute path to a file or directory'. The description adds no extra meaning, which is acceptable since the schema already defines the parameter well.

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?

Clearly states the tool scans files/directories for hardcoded secrets, listing specific types (AWS keys, GitHub tokens, etc.). The verb 'scan' and resource 'file or directory' are precise, and it differentiates from sibling scan tools like port_scan and arp_scan that operate on networks rather than files.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of when not to use it. The description simply states functionality without context for decision-making.

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