create_api_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the raw token is returned only once and never shown again, advises treating it like a password, and explains the scope options and default. This goes beyond the schema and gives critical safety information.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds essential information—no filler. The warning about token visibility is concise but critical.

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 lacking annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral context for a create operation: the one-time token return and security admonition. With only two parameters and a simple schema, this is 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 schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the scope choices ('write' (default) or 'read') and implying what they control. It also mentions the token format, which clarifies the output context, though it doesn't add parameter syntax details.

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 tool's action: 'Create a new PostKing API key.' The verb 'create' and resource 'API key' are specific, and the scope options distinguish it from sibling tools like list_api_keys and revoke_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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool—when a new API key needs to be created—and includes useful scope guidance (write/read). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it stops short of full guidance.

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