create_virtual_key

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: encryption of raw key, one-time retrieval at creation, need to save slug, immediate application of optional limits, and return of slug. This adds significant value over the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint 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?

Three sentences front-load the main action and are free of waste. Every sentence adds necessary context: storage action, encryption and slug guidance, and optional limits.

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 complexity of 11 parameters and existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential workflow: creation, encryption, slug usage, and immediate limit application. It is complete for understanding without needing to explain return values.

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 schema already documents all 11 parameters. The description does not add parameter-specific details, merely reinforces overall behavior. 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 stores a provider API key as a virtual key, specifying the verb 'store' and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_api_key by focusing on virtual keys and emphasizing encryption and slug usage.

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?

The description advises to save the returned slug for use in prompts/configs, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like create_api_key or update_virtual_key. It implies when to use the tool but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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