Retrieve a Stellar identity's private key or seed phrase by name or HD path, so you can sign or manage accounts via CLI commands.
Output an identity's secret key
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | Name of identity to lookup, default is test identity | |
| hdPath | No | If identity is a seed phrase use this hd path, default is 0 | |
| phrase | No | Output seed phrase instead of private key | |
| configDir | No | Location of config directory |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that this exposes sensitive secret material, any security implications, required permissions, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that outputs secret keys.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.
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 outputs secret keys and has no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks crucial context about the sensitive nature of the output, security considerations, and how the parameters affect the output (e.g., phrase vs. private key).
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 documents all parameters with descriptions. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.
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 states a specific verb and resource: it outputs an identity's secret key. This distinguishes it from siblings like stellar_keys_public_key, though it doesn't explicitly name that sibling for differentiation. The purpose is clear and specific.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stellar_keys_public_key. The agent is left to infer usage context from the description alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.