rhsm__get_activation_keys

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint: true. The description adds that the tool returns activation key details (names, descriptions, subscriptions) and is for RHEL registration. It also notes the limitation about answering further questions, providing context beyond annotations.

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 front-loaded with the most important info (action and call-to-action), followed by purpose and return details. It is reasonably concise, though some redundancy exists (e.g., explanation of activation keys).

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (list with pagination), the description covers all necessary aspects: what it returns (list of activation keys with details), its purpose, and immediate usage guidance. The presence of an output schema further reduces the need for additional details.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for limit and offset. The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get the list of activation keys available to the authenticated user' and explains its purpose for RHEL system registration. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'rhsm__get_activation_key' (singular) by implying a list operation.

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 includes '🟢 CALL IMMEDIATELY - No information gathering required' which explicitly guides when to use. It also advises redirecting users for further questions, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use.

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