get-key-value-store-keys

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

Because no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It does communicate that this is a paginated read operation, which is helpful, but it does not describe what the returned representation looks like or how pagination continuation is surfaced beyond the exclusiveStartKey schema.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main operation, includes the pagination qualifier, and then gives a concrete domain hint with expected keys. Nothing is redundant or wasted.

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 list-keys operation, the description plus a fully-covered schema is largely complete: it names the resource, the operation, pagination, and even relevant expected keys. It would be stronger with a note on whether the response includes just keys or also pagination metadata, but that is a minor gap for this tool.

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?

The input schema already covers all parameters with full descriptions (100% coverage), including the requirement for keyValueStoreId and the meaning of exclusiveStartKey. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb and resource: listing keys in a key-value store, and adds the pagination behavior. It is clearly distinct from siblings like get-key-value-store-record and get-key-value-store-list, which return a record's value or list stores rather than keys.

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 concrete usage context: keys expected in this actor's runs are ORDER_SUMMARY, DEDUP_UPDATE, and STATUS. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use it, but for a simple list operation the intended use case is clear enough.

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