Delete an API key

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the ownership authorization requirement, which the agent cannot infer from the annotations. It stops short of noting irreversibility or token invalidation side effects, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded and short, with the ownership constraint stated early and the API operation mapping appended. The title is repeated almost verbatim in the first sentence ('Delete an API key' / 'Deletes an API key'), a minor redundancy that keeps it from a 5.

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 single-parameter delete with destructive/idempotent annotations already covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description supplies what is needed: what it does, the ownership precondition, and the underlying endpoint. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

Only one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents the UUID id. The description's 'identified by its ID' adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (delete) and resource (API key) and identifies the selector (by ID). An agent can distinguish it from immich_create_api_key, immich_update_api_key, and immich_rotate_api_key without opening any schema.

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?

Provides a real prerequisite ('The current user must own this API key'), which is useful for deciding whether the call will succeed. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative routing (e.g., use rotate_api_key to regenerate rather than delete), leaving usage implied.

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