rotate_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that rotation doesn't change underlying encryption material, but doesn't mention side effects like whether the old envelope key is retired or if the operation is reversible. Slightly incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 two sentences plus a usage directive, all relevant and front-loaded. No filler or redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown) and is a focused operation, the description is mostly complete. It could mention return value type or prerequisites (e.g., key must exist), but overall adequate for a single-purpose tool.

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 descriptions for all three parameters (namespace, name, sequence). The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides, earning a 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?

The description clearly states the action: 'Rotate the envelope key for a specific FPE key version.' It explains what envelope rotation does (re-wraps data key without changing encryption material) and distinguishes from siblings like create_key or deactivate_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 explicitly says 'Use this for key rotation compliance requirements,' providing clear context for when to use. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the unique verb 'rotate' among siblings makes it implicit.

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