Remove 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 burden. It implies deletion but never says the removal is irreversible, what happens to servers still authorized by that key, or whether the fingerprint must match exactly. For a mutation with zero annotation coverage this is a real gap.

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 filler and the identifying parameter placed where it matters. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than true completeness.

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?

A destructive account-level mutation with no annotations and no output schema should explain irreversibility and the practical workflow (look up key, then remove). The description supplies neither, so an agent lacks what it needs beyond the raw 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 description coverage is 80%, so the schema already documents the panel, baseUrl, clientKey and applicationKey overrides. The description adds only 'by fingerprint', which confirms the selector role of the required field but nothing about format or matching semantics. Baseline 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 and resource ('Remove an SSH key from the account') and adds the identifying mechanism ('by fingerprint'), which clearly separates it from account_sshkey_list and account_sshkey_create. It never names a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of the 5 band.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative (e.g. how to first discover a fingerprint via account_sshkey_list). The agent must infer everything from the tool name.

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