openai_create_service_account

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it excels. It discloses the critical behavioral trait that the response contains a plaintext API key that is only shown once, instructing the agent to surface it immediately. It also explains the default creation of a role membership and API key, providing essential context for side 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 well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose. The important warning about the plaintext API key is highlighted with 'IMPORTANT', and the Args section is necessary given the lack of schema descriptions. 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?

For a create tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, parameters, and the most critical behavioral side effect (the one-time API key exposure). The cross-reference to openai_list_projects for project_id is helpful. The output schema handles return value details, so the description does not need to.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter in the Args section. It adds meaningful context: project_id is tied to openai_list_projects, name is straightforward, and create_service_account_only is defined with its behavioral impact. This is exactly what was needed.

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 tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new service account in a project.' It also explains the default behavior (creating a member-role membership and API key), which distinguishes it from other service account operations like update or delete.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when you need to create a service account. It even references openai_list_projects for obtaining a project_id. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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