get_api_key

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

The description adds little beyond the readOnlyHint annotation; it only restates that the operation returns information. It does not disclose what fields are returned, whether the key secret is exposed, or any other behavioral nuance.

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 compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and appends the endpoint reference, making it easy to parse.

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 get-by-id tool with one fully documented parameter and readOnly annotations, the description is largely sufficient. The main gap is not describing the returned key information, but the absence of an output schema lowers the burden on the description.

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% and the id parameter is already documented as the key ID from list_api_keys. The description does not add parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 that the tool returns information about one specific API key, which distinguishes it from list-oriented siblings like list_api_keys and list_server_api_keys. It lacks an explicit verb but 'information about' clearly conveys a read/retrieve operation.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_api_keys or get_api_key_history. The word 'specific' weakly implies retrieving a single key, but there is no explicit context or exclusion.

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