update_virtual_key

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

Annotations indicate it's not read-only or destructive. The description adds that rotating the key is immediate and limit changes propagate to downstream prompts/configs, providing useful behavioral context beyond what annotations offer. It builds on the 'openWorldHint' by explaining downstream effects.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then adding key effects and return value. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

With an output schema present, the description appropriately avoids repeating return details but mentions updated name, slug, and status. It covers the tool's effect on downstream resources, making it fairly complete for an update operation.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the description's mention of 'name, secret, note, or limits' adds minimal new information. It does not clarify edge cases or constraints beyond what the schema 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?

The description clearly states 'Update a virtual key's name, secret, note, or limits,' using a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('virtual key'). It distinguishes from siblings like create_virtual_key and delete_virtual_key by focusing on modification.

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 context by noting that key rotation takes effect immediately and limit changes affect downstream, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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