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

Adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations by disclosing that the old key is disabled immediately and that balance and founding status survive the rotation—consequences the hints do not convey. There is mild tension with destructiveHint=false, since the old credential is invalidated, but rotation tools commonly report non-destructive because the account state is preserved.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by the trigger and the state-preservation guarantee. No sentence is filler.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, it covers what changes and what is preserved. It could note that the response carries the new key and that the caller must store it, but no annotations or schema leave an agent unable to call this 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the profile_key format and the Authorization header alternative are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 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—issuing a new secret key and disabling the old one—that no sibling tool performs. An agent can distinguish this from anthill_profile or anthill_create_profile without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger condition: "Use this if your key may have leaked." It does not name a when-not case or an alternative recovery path, but the rotation context is unambiguous.

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