get_api_key

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

The description accurately indicates a read-only operation by stating 'Returns'. It specifies the exact data returned (API key, quota with units). Although no annotations are provided, the description adequately communicates the behavioral scope for a simple getter, with no hidden side effects.

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, focused sentence of 14 words, front-loading the action and result. Every word is essential, with no redundancy or filler, making it highly efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 simplicity (no parameters, output schema exists), the description is fully complete. It covers what the tool returns (API key, quota in seconds and expiry) without needing to explain return values, as the output schema handles that. No further context is required.

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?

With zero parameters, the description adds value beyond the empty schema by explaining the purpose and content of the result. It clarifies that the API key and quota details are returned, providing context not available from the schema alone.

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 it returns the account's ASR/TTS API key and its quota with units (seconds and expiry). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_current_user or get_recording_summary, which serve different retrieval purposes.

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use is given, the combination of the tool name and description, along with the context of sibling getters, clearly implies this tool is for retrieving API key and quota information. The absence of explicit exclusions or alternatives is acceptable given the obvious purpose.

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