or_current_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It indicates a read-only operation ('Show') and specifies the metadata contents, but it does not disclose any permissions, side effects, or error conditions. For a simple read operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and key details without any filler. Every word contributes 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?

Given the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains its purpose and the metadata it returns. However, it could further clarify that it requires no arguments or that it reflects the currently active key, though the tool name and context cover this. Overall, it is nearly complete for its simplicity.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is an empty object, so the description need not elaborate on parameter semantics. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter information.

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 clearly states the tool shows metadata for the current Provisioning key and lists the specific metadata fields. The verb 'Show' and resource 'Provisioning key' are specific, and the phrase 'the server is using' distinguishes it from sibling tools like or_key_get that target specific keys.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: the tool is for retrieving the server's current provisioning key metadata. However, there is no explicit comparison to alternatives or guidance on when not to use this tool versus or_key_get or or_keys_list.

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