rotate_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently states the key invalidation, generation, and cooldown triggers. It also clarifies the optional parameter's role. No contradictions; the behavioral impact is well-disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then specific cooldown details. Every word is necessary and earns its place. No fluff.

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 no output schema, the description should ideally mention what the tool returns (e.g., the new key). It describes the action and cooldowns but omits any response format or confirmation, leaving a gap for agent decision-making.

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 100%, so the input schema already explains the parameter. The tool description adds cooldown context but does not enhance understanding of the parameter itself. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool generates a new API key and invalidates the old one. It differentiates between operator and agent cooldowns, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'set_operator_key' which might set a key without rotation.

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 implicit usage context by detailing cooldown durations for operators vs agents, and the parameter description notes 'operators only' for agent_id. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not state when not to use it.

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