Add SSH key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys only that a key is added, saying nothing about duplicate-key handling, idempotency, required permissions, or what happens to the override params (panel, clientKey, applicationKey) — a meaningful gap for a write tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is concise and readable, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than deliberate economy.

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 six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits the meaning of the required name/public_key parameters and the purpose of the auth-override params, leaving the agent to reconstruct behavior from the schema.

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 67%: panel, baseUrl, clientKey, and applicationKey are documented in the schema, but the two required params (name, public_key) have no descriptions in either schema or description. The description names the 'public key' concept but adds no format or constraints, so it neither compensates for the required-param gap nor adds value beyond the schema.

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 ('Add') and resource ('SSH public key to the account'), clearly distinguishing it from account_sshkey_list and account_sshkey_remove by the mutation verb. It lacks any explicit sibling routing but the name and description together make the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus account_sshkey_remove or account_sshkey_list, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer all usage context from the name alone.

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