rotate_key

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

No annotations provided; description takes full burden. It mentions modes and outputs but omits critical behavioral details like whether rotation is irreversible, required permissions, or side effects on existing delegations. Basic safety info missing.

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 succinct sentences front-load the action and return values. Zero wasted words.

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?

All key aspects covered: two modes, default overlap, return values (DID document, rotation state, revocation results). No output schema, but description compensates adequately. Sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 80%; description adds meaning for mode, old_private_key, activation_delay_hours, and delegation_ids_to_revoke. It explains mode behavior and default delay, supplementing the schema. Missing only agent_name context.

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 'Rotate an agent's Ed25519 key' and distinguishes two modes (planned/emergency), making the action and resource unambiguous. Sibling tools like verify_rotation_chain are different, so no confusion.

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 through the two modes but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., generate_keys, revoke_delegation). No when-not-to-use guidance provided.

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