yg_auth_create_key

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

The description states credentials are not stored, which is good, but it does not explain what 'store it' means (presumably the API key is stored). No disclosure of side effects, authentication requirements, or error handling. Without annotations, more transparency is needed.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with action. However, the brevity sacrifices clarity on reuse and storage. Could be improved with more precise wording.

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?

No output schema, so return value is unspecified. Missing details on what 'reuse' entails, how the API key is stored or returned, and error conditions. Incomplete for a security-focused tool with no annotations.

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 coverage is low (25%), with only companyName described. The description mentions 'login/password' but does not clarify their format, constraints, or the role of companyId. It adds little beyond the schema.

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 creates or reuses a YouGile API key for a company using login/password. It distinguishes from sibling auth tools, but the phrase 'store it' is ambiguous and 'reuse' is not explained.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like yg_auth_companies or yg_auth_status. No mention of prerequisites or scenarios where reuse applies.

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