list_api_keys

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a meaningful behavior beyond the obvious: 'Never returns key values,' which prevents an agent from treating this as a credential retrieval tool. It doesn't mention pagination or read-only guarantees, but the security-relevant detail is valuable.

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?

One sentence delivers both the core purpose and a critical exclusion. Every word earns its place, and the security caveat is placed as a clear second clause without diluting the main message.

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 parameterless list operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what is returned, the scope, and what is deliberately omitted. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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, so there is no parameter ambiguity. The description correctly focuses on result semantics rather than input syntax, matching the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a precise resource ('this workspace's API keys'), and the particular attributes returned ('scopes and limits'). It also explicitly states what it never returns, making it unmistakable among the many list_* siblings.

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 scope is clearly anchored to the current workspace, so the agent knows which keys are in play. It doesn't enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but for a resource-specific list tool the context is sufficiently clear without extra routing.

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