list_virtual_keys

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the return fields (total, name, slug, status, usage limits, rate limits, reset state, model config), which goes beyond annotations. 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 that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a usage hint and return summary. Every sentence adds value with no unnecessary 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?

Given zero parameters, rich annotations, and an existing output schema, the description covers the tool's behavior, use context, and return structure. It is fully complete for an agent to understand when and how to use this tool.

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?

No parameters in the input schema (schema coverage 100%), so no param details are needed. The description compensates by describing the output, making it clear what the tool returns without parameters.

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?

Clearly states it lists provider API keys stored as virtual keys in the Portkey org, and mentions use cases like finding slugs before wiring prompts/configs or auditing limits. Differentiates from sibling tools like get_virtual_key (single retrieval) and create_virtual_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?

Provides explicit guidance: use to find slugs before wiring prompts/configs or auditing limits. While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use, the context and sibling tools make it clear this is for listing all keys, not for single key operations.

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