kp_unwrap_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral aspects. It states 'decrypt', implying a read-like operation, but fails to mention permissions, error states, or whether it modifies state.

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 is concise and front-loaded. However, it is somewhat terse and could benefit from a bit more structure without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient for an agent to understand return values, error handling, or prerequisites. For a decryption tool with multiple parameters, more context is needed.

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 schema has 4 parameters with only 25% coverage (ciphertext has a description). The description itself does not elaborate on instance_id, key_id, or region, even though the overall purpose of unwrapping implies their roles.

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 (unwrap/decrypt), the resource (wrapped DEK), and the method (using a root key). It distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'kp_wrap_key', which performs the inverse operation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusion criteria. Sibling tools exist but are not mentioned.

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