list_service_ssh_key_library

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the data source (Virtualizor), the nature of keys (selectable for reinstallation), and differentiates from installed keys. It does not mention pagination or side effects, but for a list tool, this is adequately transparent.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with main action, no verbosity. Each sentence adds essential information: what the tool does, output fields, distinction from sibling, and parameter origin.

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 simple list tool with one parameter, the description covers all needed context: purpose, output fields, sibling differentiation, and parameter source. No output schema exists, but output fields are listed, making it complete.

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?

Only one parameter, service_id, with schema description 'Service ID from list_services.' Description adds that it comes from list_services, but schema already covers it. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3 applies—description adds minimal extra value.

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 lists SSH keys from a legacy VPS key library (Virtualizor), specifies output fields (id, name, publicKey, fingerprint), and distinguishes from list_ssh_keys, making the purpose highly specific and 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?

Explicitly contrasts with list_ssh_keys ('keys already installed on the running server') and indicates prerequisite (service_id from list_services), providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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