update_api_key

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

Despite no annotations, description discloses key behavioral traits: renaming is cosmetic, deactivation is immediate and one-way, global confirm flag is respected, and reactivation is impossible via this tool. This fully carries the transparency burden.

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?

Four efficient sentences front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Structure logically progresses from purpose to details to limitations.

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?

Covers side effects, limitations, and intended actions. Has output schema, so return format not required. Missing error scenarios or prerequisites, but for a mutation with moderate complexity, this is nearly 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?

Schema description coverage is 75% (missing api_key_id). Description adds context beyond schema: explains renaming doesn't require confirmation but respects global flag, and that status='inactive' deactivates. Compensates well for schema gaps.

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?

Description clearly states 'Rename or deactivate an API key,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools (all workspace/member operations) as the only API key mutation tool.

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?

States when to use (rename or deactivate) and notes that reactivation must be done in the Console. Lacks explicit when-not conditions, but the context is clear given no alternative API key update tool.

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