aureon_revoke_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. The parenthetical 'delete' usefully signals this is destructive rather than a reversible disable, but it says nothing about irreversibility, required auth/permissions, or what happens to the key afterward.

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?

Six words, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. It is optimally scannable, though the extreme brevity is arguably under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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 destructive, unannotated, single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits whether revocation is permanent, whether it can be undone, and any warning that the operation removes SDK access.

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?

Single parameter with 100% schema description coverage; the schema already documents keyId as 'API key ID'. The description adds no format or sourcing detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb (revoke/delete) and resource (SDK API key), and the parenthetical clarifies the operation's destructive nature. It is clearly distinguishable from aureon_create_api_key and aureon_list_api_keys, though it doesn't explicitly name the nearest sibling, aureon_toggle_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 on when to revoke versus when to use aureon_toggle_api_key (which presumably disables rather than deletes), and no prerequisites or confirmation context. The agent must infer the use case from the name alone.

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