rotate_api_key

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description reveals that the new secret is exposed in the transcript, the previous secret remains valid during a transition period, and both secrets must never be logged. This adds critical behavioral context.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, behavioral detail, and actionable guidance. No fluff; front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Covers essential aspects (purpose, transition window, security). Lacks explicit error conditions or prerequisites, but given the output schema and full parameter descriptions, it is nearly complete.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about the transition period's effect (key_transition_expires_at) but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 states 'Rotate an API key without changing its identity or scopes,' specifying the action and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like update_api_key by emphasizing identity and scope preservation.

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 provides post-rotation guidance (store securely, update callers, never log) and hints at the transition window, but does not explicitly state when to use rotate versus alternatives like create or update.

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