get_client_key_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the purpose without mentioning idempotency, side effects, rate limits, or error behavior. For a read operation, it lacks transparency about what happens if the attribute does not exist or if the client is invalid.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It is well front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every part serves to inform the agent of the core function.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not specify the return format or metadata fields, nor does it provide context on prerequisites or error handling. A retrieval tool should give more detail on what 'key information' encompasses.

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 input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. It mentions 'client certificate attribute' which loosely aligns with the 'attr' parameter, but does not clarify valid values or format. Baseline 3 is 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves key information for a client certificate attribute, including certificate and key metadata. The verb 'get' and resource 'key info' are specific. However, it doesn't differentiate from similar tools like get_client_secret or get_realm_keys, but the focus on 'certificate attribute' helps distinguish it from other client info tools.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or restrictions. Given the large number of sibling tools, guidance on when to choose get_client_key_info over others is absent.

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