Retrieve API Key

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: secrets are returned exactly once, must be stored securely with concrete examples, and the answer changes based on approval state. Also discloses that the server keeps its original credentials, which is critical operational behavior not captured by annotations.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then return value, security guidance, pending-state behavior, and credential-switching caveat. Each sentence carries distinct operational value.

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?

Complete for a two-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema: explains return values, storage requirements, approval gating, and the server-restart caveat. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and handle both outcomes.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters in detail. The description correctly references the prior `request_api_key` call as the source of these values, adding context but not exceeding what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb ('Collect') and resource ('the API key the user approved'), and explicitly ties it to the sibling `request_api_key` as its counterpart. Distinguishes itself clearly from the initiation step.

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?

Explicitly frames the when: after `request_api_key` and after user approval. Explains the pending-state behavior ('wait and try again') and gives an alternative action (update config and restart) to actually switch credentials, which is stronger than most usage guidance.

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