seerr_regenerate_api_key

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'WRITE: this modifies your Seerr instance' adds some context beyond the raw annotation by specifying the modification effect (regenerating API key). However, it does not disclose impacts like invalidation of the old key, permission requirements, or reversibility, which would be valuable.

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 sentence that leads with the action and includes a warning. It is concise and readable, though the word order could be improved for clarity. Every word serves a purpose.

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 that the tool has no parameters, an output schema, and annotations, the description is mostly sufficient for a simple mutation. It misses explicit when-to-use context and does not elaborate on consequences beyond 'modifies'. The distinction from reading settings is implied but not stated.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so the description has no param responsibilities. The baseline for zero params is 4; the description adds no extra parameter info because none is needed.

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 states a clear action: regenerate the API key and retrieve main settings. It differentiates from siblings like seerr_list_settings_main (read-only) and seerr_create_settings_main (create), though the phrasing is slightly awkward. The 'WRITE' note reinforces the mutation nature.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used when the API key needs to be reset, nor does it contrast with list/create settings main. The 'WRITE' label implies a distinction but does not provide actionable direction.

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