recover_my_key

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds key behavioral traits: it NEVER returns the key over the wire (only emails), and confirmation is identical regardless of key existence (enumeration-safe). No contradictions.

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 well-structured paragraph. It is concise but could be slightly tighter; however, every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with purpose and key warnings.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description states what returns ('DC Hub's neutral confirmation'). It covers all necessary aspects: action, input, behavior, safety, and return value. No gaps for a 1-parameter, non-destructive 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?

The single parameter 'email' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description adds meaning: 'Pass your human's email', 'Param: email (required)', and explains its role in the recovery process. The mention of 'required' adds information not present in 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 uses specific verb 'Recover' targeting 'DC Hub key', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools (e.g., bind_email, claim_free_key). It explicitly states the action and resource.

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?

Explicit usage context: 'Use this when your human had a key, lost it, and knows the email they bound it to.' It does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for the given scenario.

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