marketplace_rotate_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the key side effect—new key creation and 24-hour expiry of the old key—which is valuable. Yet it omits details like whether the new key is returned, auth requirements beyond ownership (though schema mentions owner), and failure modes.

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 concise and front-loaded: two short sentences, zero wasted words. It states the action, reason, and the key behavioral outcome 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?

The operation is a mutation with no output schema and no annotations. The description explains the expiry behavior but does not mention what is returned (e.g., the new API key), which is a critical gap for an agent to invoke and handle the response correctly. Given the simplicity, this missing return-value info makes it incomplete.

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 baseline is 3. The parameter descriptions already explain keyId and userAddress (including owner requirement). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 ('Rotate') and resource ('API key'), clarifying the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like marketplace_create_api_key and marketplace_revoke_api_key by explaining the rotation semantics: creates a new key and expires the old one.

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 phrase 'for security' implies a purpose, and the behavior described (new key + 24h expiry) provides context. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose rotation over creating or revoking, nor does it give exclusions or alternative tool suggestions.

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