List Tailscale tailnet keys. Default shows auth keys; set 'all' to true to include OAuth clients and federated identities.
List keys in your tailnet. By default lists auth keys only. Set 'all' to true to include OAuth clients and federated identities.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| all | No | When true, returns all key types (auth keys, OAuth clients, federated identities). Default: false |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.13.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond restating the listing behavior. No additional traits like pagination or rate limits are disclosed.
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 concise with two sentences, no wasted words, and effectively communicates the core purpose and parameter behavior.
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 tool with one optional boolean and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, default behavior, and parameter effect, complemented by sufficient annotations.
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?
With 100% schema coverage, the parameter is fully documented. The description only reiterates that the default is auth keys only, adding no new meaning beyond the schema's description of the 'all' parameter.
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 it lists keys in a tailnet, specifying the default behavior (auth keys only) and the optional 'all' parameter for broader scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tailscale_get_key for single keys.
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 explicit guidance on default vs extended usage, but does not explicitly mention when to prefer sibling tools like tailscale_get_key for specific keys.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.