Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
herohunt-mcp

herohunt-mcp

Official
by herohunt-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

api_keys_rotate

Rotate an API key by deactivating the old key and issuing a new one with the same scopes.

Instructions

Rotate an API key: deactivate old, issue new with same scopes.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "keyId": "<keyId>"
    },
    "name": "api_keys_rotate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyIdYesID of the key to rotate.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately states that the old key is deactivated and a new one is issued with the same scopes, but it does not detail consequences (e.g., immediate invalidation of the old key, whether the new key's secret is returned) or any authorization requirements.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence with a colon to separate purpose and behavior. Every word contributes meaning, and the structure is front-loaded and clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core action adequately. However, it could be improved by mentioning what is returned (e.g., new key details) or any side effects like old key immediate expiration.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter description ('ID of the key to rotate'). The tool has a single parameter, and the description does not enhance understanding of its usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Rotate an API key') and specifies the outcome ('deactivate old, issue new with same scopes'). It uniquely identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools like api_keys_create and api_keys_revoke.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for rotating keys while preserving scopes, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., when to rotate vs. revoke and recreate). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools