Api Key Create

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

Annotations only declare the non-readonly/non-destructive/non-idempotent profile, but the description adds critical traits beyond them: the plaintext key is returned exactly once, must be relayed immediately, is a secret, and cannot be retrieved later. It also discloses the admin-permission requirement.

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 tight sentences with zero filler; the core operation leads and the one-time-secret caveat follows immediately, which is the highest-value information front-loaded appropriately.

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 no output schema, the description correctly compensates by explaining that the response carries the plaintext key exactly once and cannot be recovered. It does not describe the rest of the returned key object, but for a 3-param create tool it is essentially 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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (name, expirationDays, organizationId) are already documented in the schema, including the 'omit or 0 for never expires' semantics. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Create a new named API key for an organization.' The 'create' verb cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling api_key_list and api_key_delete tools without needing the schema.

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 an important prerequisite ('Requires organization admin permission'), but never states when to use this over alternatives (e.g., api_key_list to review existing keys, or when to create vs rotate). Usage is implied by the verb rather than guided.

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