Revoke an API key by key_id from list_api_keys. Requires an API key. Revoking the current key will fail subsequent calls.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key_id | Yes | key_id from list_api_keys |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key_id | Yes | ||
| revoked | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: authentication requirement and the consequence of revoking the key currently in use. No contradiction with 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?
Two concise sentences with no filler. The core action and key source are front-loaded, followed by the critical requirement and consequence.
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 single-parameter tool with output schema and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description covers the essential operational warnings. Minor ambiguity remains around whether 'Requires an API key' refers to authentication context specifically, but it is sufficient.
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 description coverage is 100%: key_id is described as coming from list_api_keys. The description reiterates this provenance but adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.
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 ('Revoke'), a specific resource ('API key'), and the identifier source ('key_id from list_api_keys'). Clearly distinguishes this from create_api_key and 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?
Provides clear context: an API key is required, and revoking the current key causes subsequent calls to fail. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives, but the key source and self-invalidation warning give enough guidance for selecting and safely invoking this tool.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct roles, and the descriptions explicitly separate product lookup from recall search. However, the multiple recall search entry points (by query, UPC, image, and identifier) overlap enough that an agent could pick the wrong one without carefully reading the details.
Tool names consistently follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern such as add_, list_, remove_, search_, get_, create_, revoke_, and mark_. The single-word signup is the only minor deviation, but it does not undermine the overall naming system.
At 19 tools, the set is in the borderline-heavy range. The count is justified by the multiple subdomains like API key management, inventory, watch patterns, notifications, and recall searching, but it still feels slightly above the ideal well-scoped tool surface.
Core recall search, product lookup, inventory tracking, watch pattern management, notifications, and API key lifecycle are all covered well. Minor gaps exist such as no way to update a watch pattern or view account usage limits, but agents can generally work around them.