rotate_vault_key

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the tool mints a new version under a distinct audit action, that the running container keeps the old value until redeploy, and that the value is encrypted and not echoed. Also notes auth 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?

Every sentence adds value. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by functional distinction, usage guidance, redeploy note, and auth requirement. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, side effects, and auth. However, it does not mention the return value or response format, which is a minor gap for a write operation. Still, given the thoroughness elsewhere and no output schema, a 4 is reasonable.

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% with descriptive parameter docs (env, key, value). The description adds no new parameter details beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Rotate a vault secret's value'), specifies the HTTP endpoint, and distinguishes the tool from its sibling set_vault_key by identifying the intended use case (compromised or expiring secret).

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool vs set_vault_key ('Use this when... use set_vault_key for...'), advises redeploying dependent apps, and mentions the required INSTANODE_TOKEN.

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