create_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description discloses an important behavioral trait: the key secret is only returned once during creation. It does not discuss permissions or rate limits, but the secret disclosure is a key behavioral note.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the 'Args' section is somewhat redundant with the schema, and the explanation is not overly verbose.

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 existence of an output schema, the description covers the creation flow and the important note about secret being returned once. Yet it omits details on idempotency, error conditions, and does not reference sibling tools.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It lists the three arguments with brief descriptions (Project ID, API key name, Optional description), which adds basic meaning but lacks depth on constraints or valid values.

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 for data ingestion, used for sending metrics and data. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_api_keys (list) and delete_api_key (delete), making the purpose specific.

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 an API key for data ingestion is needed. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the context is clear enough with siblings like list_api_keys.

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