list_api_keys

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

Given no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently states that only the key prefix and creation time are returned, not the full key, which manages expectations. However, it does not mention whether all keys are returned or pagination, nor any permission requirements.

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 two concise sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the primary action and resource, the second adds critical detail about what is and is not returned. It is front-loaded and 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?

For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential: what it does, what it returns (prefix and creation time), and what it does not return (full key). It could be more complete by specifying the response format (e.g., array of objects) but is largely adequate.

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% with a single parameter described as 'Agent ID'. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by using the phrase '指定 Agent' (specified agent) which aligns with the parameter. No additional constraints or formatting details are provided.

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 API keys for a specified agent, and distinguishes itself by specifying what is returned (prefix and creation time) and what is not (full key). This clearly differentiates from siblings like rotate_api_key or update_agent.

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 implies usage when you need to view API keys for an agent, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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