delete_api_keys

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It merely states that it is a 'mutation' but does not explain the destructive scope, whether it deletes all API keys for the user, or any security or confirmation implications. This lacks transparency.

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 brief and front-loaded with the resource and operation type. It avoids verbosity, though the phrase 'API Keys · mutation deleteApiKeys' partially duplicates the tool name. Overall, it is concise and well-structured.

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 destructive operation with no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to specify whether it deletes all API keys for a user or a specific set, and it omits context about potential side effects. This ambiguity is especially problematic given the sibling 'delete_api_key_by_id'.

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 input schema already provides full coverage for both parameters ('user' and 'customer_slug'), so the description adds minimal value. It provides an example for 'user' but does not explain the purpose of 'customer_slug' or how parameters relate to each other.

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 identifies the tool as a mutation to delete API keys, and the variable 'user' indicates the target. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling tool 'delete_api_key_by_id', leaving the exact scope (e.g., all keys for a user vs. a single key) ambiguous.

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 'delete_api_key_by_id' or 'create_api_key'. It only lists variables with an example, but no exclusions or context for selection.

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