clear_api_key

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

The description adds that the env var is unaffected, which is helpful. Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not contradict them. However, it lacks further behavioral context (e.g., error scenarios, effect on dependent operations). It adds marginal value beyond annotations.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information. Every word is meaningful and concise.

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 zero-parameter tool with clear annotations and an output schema, the description provides exactly what is needed: what is removed and what is not affected. No additional context is necessary for correct usage.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description is not required to explain any. The schema coverage is 100% (no params). The description focuses on the tool's action and its scope, which effectively communicates what the tool does without needing parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb 'Remove' and clearly identifies the resource (stored YNAB API key from OS keychain). It distinguishes from siblings like set_api_key by noting that the environment variable is unaffected, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 one wants to clear the stored key but does not explicitly state when to use vs. not use this tool or mention alternatives. Given the sibling set_api_key, the context helps, but no direct usage guidance is provided.

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