paperclip_create_agent_key

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

Discloses critical behavior: key shown only once (store securely), board-only access, and detailed error handling (401, 403, 404). Annotations only provide destructiveHint false and openWorldHint false, so description adds substantial value.

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?

Well-structured with sections for warning, arguments, returns, examples, and error handling. Front-loaded with important security note. Every sentence is informative and concise.

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 details the return value (key record with fields). Covers error states, usage scenarios, and prerequisites. Tool is simple and all relevant context is provided.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds example values and clarifies optionality, providing moderate additional 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 states the action (create) and resource (long-lived API key for an agent). It is distinct from sibling tools like paperclip_create_agent or paperclip_create_secret by focusing on agent-specific keys.

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?

Includes explicit use cases: 'Use when provisioning a new API key... or rotating a compromised key' and 'Don't use when the agent already has a valid key' with alternative tool suggestion (paperclip_get_agent). Also specifies board-only requirement.

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