qui_create_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely instructs to call the endpoint without stating the mutating side effect (creating an API key), any required authentication, or potential consequences. The parameter-passing detail is structural, not behavioral.

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 front-loads the endpoint and quickly explains argument structure. No filler or redundancy. Every clause serves a purpose.

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?

The description provides the calling convention but lacks details on required body fields, expected input, or side effects. While the presence of an output schema covers return values, the agent remains uncertain about what to include in the JSON body. For a creation endpoint, this gap makes it functional but not complete.

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 is a generic arguments object with no field details (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining how to pass path variables, query values, and a JSON body via arguments.params and arguments.body, which is essential for constructing a valid request. This adds significant value 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 specifies calling the POST /api-keys/ endpoint, which combined with the tool name indicates API key creation. It differentiates from siblings like qui_list_api_keys and qui_delete_api_key by referencing the create endpoint, though it could more explicitly state 'creates an API 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios for use, nor does it differentiate from qui_create_client_api_key or other creation tools. The only 'guidance' is about parameter placement, not usage context.

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