set_algochains_api_key

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool validates the key against the bridge health endpoint, which is useful behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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; front-loaded with purpose, includes key format, validation, and key acquisition method. No wasted words.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, key format, validation, and next steps (creating a key). Complete and self-contained.

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% with one parameter. The schema description already explains the key format. The tool description repeats this but adds context about validation and step number, providing marginal extra value. Baseline is 3.

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 clearly identifies the tool's purpose: setting the AlgoChains developer API key for marketplace and bridge access. It specifies the key format (ac_live_* or ac_test_*) and mentions validation against the bridge health endpoint. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_developer_key and revoke_developer_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 description labels this as 'Step 4,' indicating a sequence in a workflow, and tells where to get a key (create_developer_key tool or website). It provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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