Retrieve details for a specific Tailscale key (auth key, OAuth client, or federated identity) by providing its key ID. Quickly identify key type, status, and metadata to manage access.
Get details for a specific key (auth key, OAuth client, or federated identity).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keyId | Yes | The key ID (auth key, OAuth client, or federated identity) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.13.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states 'Get details,' which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). However, it adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. Given annotation coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.
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 directly conveys the tool's purpose with no extraneous words. It is efficiently front-loaded and immediately informative.
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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and full annotation coverage, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what keys are applicable, and does not require an output schema explanation.
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 covers the single parameter (keyId) with a description identical in scope to the tool description. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning or usage details beyond the schema.
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 the action (Get), the resource (key), and specifies the types of keys (auth key, OAuth client, federated identity). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like tailscale_list_keys and tailscale_create_key by focusing on retrieving details for a specific key.
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 implies usage when you have a specific key ID. Context signals (sibling tools) indicate there is a list counterpart, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this vs other key tools. It provides clear context but lacks exclusionary guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.