List org API keys

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. The description adds the 'prefixes only' detail, which informs the user that full key secrets are not returned. However, it does not disclose pagination, ordering, or whether the list is scoped to the current user or an organization.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and the key constraint ('prefixes only'), making it highly scannable and appropriately sized for such a simple tool.

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?

With no output schema and minimal annotation detail, the description leaves gaps about what 'metadata' includes, how org_id affects results, and the shape of the response. For a list tool, some information about scoping and returned fields is expected.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the org_id parameter. The agent must infer that org_id is an optional organization filter from the parameter name alone, which is insufficient for clear understanding.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('key metadata'), and adds a clear qualifier ('prefixes only') that distinguishes it from key creation/revocation tools. It is immediately obvious what this tool does, even without the title.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apikey_create or apikey_revoke. It does not mention the optional org_id filter, prerequisites, or when to prefer another tool.

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