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

Beyond the readOnly/destructive annotations, the description discloses concrete behavioral facts: results are ordered newest first, the exact fields returned, that secret key values are never returned, and that a specific 'Manage API keys' permission granted via the approval screen is required. This is meaningful auth and data-exposure context an agent cannot get from the annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and ordering, then returns and permission needs. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema present, the description is fully sufficient: scope, ordering, returned fields, permission requirements, and a security caveat are all covered. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List API keys') plus scope ('for the authorized ActivitySmith account') and ordering ('newest first'). An agent can distinguish it at a glance from siblings like create_api_key, delete_api_key, and rename_api_key.

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 account-level scope and permission requirement imply when the tool applies, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over other listing tools (e.g., list_account_users, list_tags) or any stated exclusions. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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