apikeys_revoke_api_key

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: 'Permanently revoke', 'key will stop working immediately', 'cannot be undone', and the need for human confirmation. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with a crucial warning about destructiveness and human confirmation. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy. Highly efficient.

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 tool is simple (1 parameter, output schema exists). The description covers purpose, irreversibility, immediate effect, and safety requirement. It could mention idempotency (that revoking an already revoked key has no effect), but the annotation covers that. Overall fairly complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the parameter ('API key (dnx_...) to permanently revoke. Required.'). The description does not add semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the action ('revoke'), the resource ('DataNexus API key'), and the immediate consequence ('will stop working immediately'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like apikeys_generate_api_key and apikeys_rotate_api_key by focusing on permanent removal.

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?

The description provides a strong guideline: 'requires human confirmation before use in automated pipelines.' It warns of irreversibility. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like generate or rotate, missing a clear 'when to use vs not use' statement.

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