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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the irreversible nature, the 401 response, the separate Stripe cancellation requirement, return fields, cost, and latency. This exceeds typical disclosure for a destructive action.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, irreversibility, billing caveat, usage guidance, input clarification, return values, cost, and latency. The structured bullet format enhances readability without unnecessary fluff.

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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers what, why, when, when not, parameters, return values, cost, and performance, leaving no critical operational gaps.

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 is empty, and the description explicitly states no body or query parameters are needed, while clarifying that authentication comes from the Authorization: Bearer header. This adds meaning beyond the empty schema and prevents confusion.

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?

Description clearly states the tool 'permanently deactivates the API key used to make this request' with specific consequences (401 on subsequent calls). It distinguishes itself from related tools like get_api_key and create_free_key by emphasizing irreversibility and the billing nuance.

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?

Explicitly lists when to use (rotate key, compromised key) and when not to use (check quota → use get_api_key, intend to keep using API). This provides clear decision guidance and names an alternative tool.

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