Create an API key

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

Beyond the annotations (which only say this is a non-read-only, non-destructive write), the description discloses the critical irreversibility that the raw secret is returned exactly once and the privilege-inheritance rule that a new key can never exceed the current key's permissions, vault scope, capabilities or lifetime. This is exactly the context an agent needs before an unrecoverable mutation.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the irreversible return, then the scope constraint, then the consent condition. No filler or repetition.

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 7-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the response ('raw secret exactly once') and the privilege ceiling. A minor gap is not stating what to do if the secret is lost (e.g. revoke and recreate), but nothing essential to invoking it correctly 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds cross-cutting meaning by framing every optional field as bounded by the current key's scope. It does not restate individual fields such as never/duration_days interplay, but the schema already carries that.

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 and resource ("Creates a new API key") plus the key return behavior, which cleanly separates it from oneguard_keys_list, oneguard_keys_update and oneguard_keys_revoke. An agent can identify the operation without opening the 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?

Gives an explicit precondition ("Only call this when the user explicitly asked to create a key") and routes to the sibling oneguard_keys_list when the current scope is unknown. Both the when and the when-not are stated.

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