gorelo_list_api_keys

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description goes further by disclosing sort order (newest first) and that key values are deliberately withheld from the payload. That field-exclusion detail is the kind of context an agent cannot infer from the schema or 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?

Two tight sentences, action and ordering first, the security caveat second. No filler and nothing an agent must read past to get the point.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly sketches what comes back (names and details, not secret values), and pagination lives in the schema. Adequate for a simple zero-required-parameter read tool, though an explicit note that the listing is unfiltered would close the last gap.

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 coverage is 100%, with cursor and pageSize fully documented including range and default, so the description carries no burden here. It adds nothing about pagination behavior, which is fine given the schema covers it — baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists your Gorelo API keys') plus ordering ('newest first') and field scope ('names and details only, never the key values'). No sibling tool covers API keys, so an agent can immediately tell this is the only key-listing route.

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?

Usage is implied — browse/inspect API keys — and the sentence 'never the key values' usefully heads off a misuse attempt (expecting secrets back). But it never states when to use this versus anything else, nor where to go if the actual key value is needed.

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