listSubAPIKeysV5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses secrets are never returned, automatic filtering of system keys, pagination mechanism, expiration statuses, and required permissions. It covers all key behavioral aspects.

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 well-structured with sections and bold headers, front-loading the main purpose. It is slightly lengthy due to detailed expiration tables and filtered keys, but every sentence adds value given no output schema.

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?

The description covers authentication, security, pagination, response contents, and use cases. It lacks explicit parameter descriptions but compensates with detailed behavioral notes. Overall, it provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 description explains pagination semantics (default limit=20, Base64 cursor) and implies subuid is the sub-account identifier. However, it does not provide explicit, separate descriptions for each parameter, leaving some inference to the user.

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 queries all API keys of a sub-account with pagination, using the master account's API key. It provides specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like queryAPIKey.

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?

It explicitly states only master accounts can call this endpoint and lists use cases (managing sub-account API keys, auditing, etc.). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives.

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