Unraid API apiKey

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the basic safety profile. The description adds important behavioral context beyond the annotations: the operation deliberately avoids returning key material, which is a meaningful security-conscious trait an agent should know before invoking the tool.

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 entire description is one tight, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the operation, the object, and the key security qualifier efficiently.

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 one-parameter read-only query tool with rich annotations, the description covers the essential operational context: what is fetched, the scope, and the sensitive-data caveat. No output schema exists, but 'metadata and grants' gives a reasonable outline of the return content. It is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 compensate, but it only minimally implies that 'id' identifies the API key. It does not explain where the id comes from, what format it should be in, or how it relates to other key-related tools. The semantic value added over the bare schema is thin.

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 ('Get'), identifies the exact resource ('one API key's metadata and grants'), and clarifies the scope with 'one', distinguishing it from the sibling query_api_keys plural tool. It also adds a meaningful qualifier about not returning key material, which makes the purpose even more precise.

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 word 'one' implies this tool is for retrieving a single API key by ID rather than listing all keys, but the description does not explicitly name the alternative or explain when to choose this tool over query_api_keys or other key-related siblings. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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