iam_create_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description fully informs about important behaviors: long-lived credentials persisting beyond sessions, secret key returned only once, and deletion requiring a special flag due to lack of tags. This fully compensates for missing 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?

Concise and well-structured. The purpose is stated first, then critical behavioral details, usage constraints, and deletion implications. Every sentence is necessary and informative.

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's complexity (4 parameters, 1 required) and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: sensitive nature, parameter mutual exclusivity, persistence, response limitation, and clean-up requirements. No gaps remain.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds only the mutual exclusivity reminder, which is already in the schema. It does not provide new details beyond the parameter descriptions.

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 action 'Create an IAM API key' and specifies the target resources 'for an application or a user'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like iam_create_application and iam_list_api_keys by focusing on key creation.

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?

Provides explicit guidance that exactly one of application_id or user_id must be used, cluing the agent into mutual exclusivity. Also advises restricting access to trusted agents. However, it does not compare with alternative ways to create credentials or mention when not to use this tool.

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