aureon_toggle_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It never discloses the critical caveat that a toggle is state-dependent (non-idempotent: calling it twice on the same key returns the key to its original state), nor auth/permission requirements, nor what happens when the key is already in the target state.

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 zero filler, which is appropriate for a one-parameter operation. It reads as a fragment without a terminating period, but nothing is wasted.

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 trivial one-param toggle with no output schema the description is barely adequate, but because annotations are absent the state-dependent/non-idempotent nature of a toggle is the one thing an agent most needs and it is missing.

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 description coverage is 100% (keyId is documented in-schema) and there is only one parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, identifier-shape, or source hints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 (toggle) and resource (SDK API key) plus the two states it flips between (active/paused), which cleanly separates it from aureon_create_api_key, aureon_list_api_keys and aureon_revoke_api_key. It stops short of naming those siblings, but the operation is 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 when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no contrast against the adjacent lifecycle tools (revoke vs toggle). The agent must infer that this is the reversible pause path rather than the destructive revoke.

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