Create a new API key. The raw key is in this response ONLY — it is stored hashed and can never be shown again. Handle it as a secret.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "create_key"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| label | No | Human-readable label for the key (shown in listings). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that the raw key is only available in this response, is stored hashed, and must be handled as a secret. No annotations present, so description carries full burden.
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?
Two sentences: first states purpose, second gives crucial behavioral info. No wasted words, front-loaded.
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?
Tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. Description covers the key behavior and security note. Could mention response format but not necessary given context.
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 only parameter 'label' is fully described in the input schema (human-readable). Description adds no further meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 'Create a new API key' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like revoke_key and list_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?
Provides critical usage note about key being shown only once and stored hashed, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.