list_api_keys

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that raw keys are never returned and lists the metadata fields. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or explicitly state that it is a safe read operation.

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 consists of two concise sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the main purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior by listing output fields. It is complete for a simple list operation, though it could mention whether pagination or sorting is supported.

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 has zero parameters, with 100% schema coverage. The description adds value by enumerating the metadata fields returned (name, creation time, last use, revoked), which goes beyond the baseline expectation.

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 lists instance API keys, emphasizing metadata only and that raw key values are never returned. It specifies the exact fields shown (name, creation time, last use, revoked). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which are all dataset-oriented.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the sibling tools are all dataset-related and this is the only API key tool, there is no guidance on prerequisites or use cases other than the implicit purpose.

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