Create an API key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral trait: the raw key is returned exactly once and must be stored. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or other side effects.

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 long, concise, and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: the first states the core action, the second highlights the critical one-time return of the key.

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 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides essential context (purpose, key return behavior). It could be more complete by explaining the effect of optional parameters like app_id or workspace_id, but it suffices for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning beyond the schema. It adds context for 'tier' (air|pro|pro_max) and 'spend_limit_usd' (daily spend limit), and mentions 'App ID' for app_id. But it does not describe the 'name' or 'workspace_id' parameters.

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 creates an API key with specific tiers (air, pro, pro_max). The verb 'Mint' and resource 'API key' are specific. It differentiates from siblings like revoke_api_key and list_api_keys by focusing on creation.

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 for when to use the tool (creating API keys with optional binding and spend limit). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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