Api Key Delete

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

Adds substantial context beyond the destructiveHint annotation: integrations stop working immediately, the MCP server itself may be destroyed if the acting key is deleted, and organization admin permission is required. These are exactly the consequences an agent must surface before calling.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by the impact and the permission requirement. No filler.

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 destructive, non-idempotent operation with no output schema, the description covers effect, self-destruct risk, and authorization. An agent has everything needed to warn and act 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% – both organizationId and apiKeyId are documented with pointer tools (organization_list, api_key_list). The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3.

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 ('Delete (revoke) an API key of an organization') and clarifies the effect of deletion. An agent can distinguish this from api_key_create, api_key_list, and webhook_rotate_secret readily.

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?

Implied usage (revoking a key), with a strong consequence note, but no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative procedures (e.g., rotate vs delete). Presents the precondition (admin permission) but not the decision criteria.

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