stalwart_list_api_keys

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that tokens are masked, which is a useful security detail. However, it does not mention other behavioral aspects such as read-only nature, pagination, or any side effects, leaving gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with a useful parenthetical. There is no wasted wording.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is very thin. It lacks details about pagination/limit behavior, what happens when no keys exist, and any authorization or scope context. With 0% schema parameter coverage and no annotations, the description is insufficient to fully understand the tool.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the 'limit' parameter at all. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema, and with zero coverage, it fails to compensate.

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 states a specific action ('List') on a specific resource ('Stalwart API keys'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_accounts or list_domains. The parenthetical also adds a distinguishing feature about masked tokens.

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 usage is implied: if you need to list API keys, use this tool. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use it versus alternatives like create_api_key or delete_api_key, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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