ssh_key_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, but 'List' implies a non-destructive read. It also does not disclose authentication requirements, pagination, or return format beyond mentioning IDs, though for a simple 0-param list tool this is a minor gap.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and object. It is concise, with no wasted words or filler, and earns every word's place.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and the returned ID field. While it could mention whether all keys are returned or the ordering, the tool's simplicity means the description is essentially complete for its purpose.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty (100% coverage). Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies when there are no parameters, and the description need not explain parameter semantics. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('SSH public keys') and scope ('stored'), and even specifies the output includes IDs. This makes the tool's function unmistakable and distinguishes it from sibling tools listing VMs, images, volumes, etc.

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 implies usage for retrieving SSH public key IDs, and the resource name makes it obvious when to use it, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. There is no mention of, for example, 'use this instead of vm_list for SSH key operations.'

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