List API Keys

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, covering safety and scope. The description adds valuable context by specifying the prerequisite ('Requires a configured API key'), which is not captured in annotations, enhancing transparency about authentication needs.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by a prerequisite. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose and prerequisites, but lacks details on return values (e.g., format of listed keys) and behavioral aspects like pagination or rate limits, which could be useful despite the annotations.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4 as there are no parameters to document. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose and prerequisites instead.

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 specific action ('Lists') and resource ('your StacksFinder API keys'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'revoke_api_key' (destructive) and 'setup_api_key' (creation). It precisely defines the tool's scope without ambiguity.

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 clear context by stating 'Requires a configured API key,' indicating a prerequisite for use. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'setup_api_key' or 'revoke_api_key,' nor does it specify exclusions, leaving some guidance implicit.

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