Create an SSH key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Free' is a useful cost signal, but nothing is said about authentication/permissions required, idempotency or duplicate-name handling, or what the operation returns. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a substantial gap.

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 very short sentences, front-loaded with the action. The 'Free.' fragment is low-cost and does convey a pricing trait, though it reads as an afterthought rather than structured guidance.

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 write tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented nested-object parameter, the description is far too thin. It omits auth requirements, failure modes, and return behavior that an agent would need to invoke it reliably.

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 67% and the description mentions no parameters at all. The 'labels' parameter is a nested object with no description in either the schema or the description, so it is completely undocumented. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Add an SSH public key'), which cleanly separates it from the list_ssh_keys and delete_ssh_key siblings. It does not, however, explicitly name those siblings or clarify scope (e.g. account-level vs. project-level key).

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus cloud_list_ssh_keys/cloud_delete_ssh_key, nor any prerequisites or preconditions for creation. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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