aureon_list_api_keys

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It communicates two useful traits: this is a read/list operation and it is scoped to the authenticated wallet, implying an auth requirement. It says nothing about pagination, ordering, or whether revoked/inactive keys are included in the result.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the resource and scope appear before any qualifying clause. Nothing is wasted for a parameterless listing tool.

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?

For a simple parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and its scope but omits the shape of the return (fields per key, pagination, empty-state behavior). Adequate but leaves the agent guessing about the response.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema (empty object) is fully consistent with that. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool has a baseline of 4; there is no parameter semantics to clarify further.

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 names a specific verb (List) and resource (SDK API keys) and scopes it to the authenticated wallet, which cleanly separates it from siblings like aureon_create_api_key, aureon_revoke_api_key, and aureon_toggle_api_key. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, but the verb makes the read-only listing intent unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the sibling key-management tools (create/revoke/toggle). The phrase 'for the authenticated wallet' implies a prerequisite (an authenticated wallet session) but no explicit when/when-not conditions are given.

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