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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful behavioral detail that the secret is omitted, but it does not describe authentication requirements or the returned fields.

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 a single compact sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and immediately clarifies the secret-omission scope.

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 simple one-parameter getter with rich safety annotations, the description covers the main behavioral nuance: the secret is not returned. Because there is no output schema, it could say more about what metadata is returned, but the essential context for calling it correctly is present.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema as 'API key ID.' with 100% schema description coverage. The tool description does not add format examples or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieve an API key. The parenthetical '(without its secret)' adds an important scope detail and distinguishes it from operations that expose secrets, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like list-api-keys.

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 use case is implied: fetch a single API key when the key metadata is needed without revealing the secret. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus list-api-keys, update-api-key, or regenerate-api-key.

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