stellar_keys_use

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'For all commands' hints at a persisted global scope, but the description never says the change is written to config, whether the named key must already exist, whether it is reversible, or what happens on an invalid name.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is part of why the behavioral gaps exist.

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?

For a simple two-parameter config setter with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but omits persistence semantics and the identity-vs-network ambiguity that an agent needs resolved before invoking it.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's 'identity' framing conflicts with the schema text for 'name', which reads 'Set the default network name', so it adds context but does not resolve which value the parameter actually expects.

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+resource combination (set the default identity), which is clearer than a bare title. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the sibling stellar_network_use, which performs the structurally identical 'set default network' operation, leaving ambiguity about which 'default' is being changed.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as stellar_keys_add, stellar_keys_list, or stellar_network_use. The agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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