Account Keys & Tokens

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, establishing safety. Description adds context about listing credentials and return types but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey. Adequate but not exceptional.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose and uses bullet points and examples. It is reasonably concise, though some redundancy exists (e.g., repeated 'subkeys and API tokens'). Overall efficient and well-structured.

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 (list with two optional boolean params) and presence of output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage guidelines, and examples. No additional context is necessary for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

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%, with both parameters described clearly in the input schema. The description mentions checking token expiry and revoked tokens, which hints at the parameters but adds no new meaning beyond their schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all credentials registered for this account: Paradex subkeys and API tokens.' It uses specific verb+resource and distinguishes from siblings like paradex_generate_subkey (which generates keys) and paradex_account_overview (broader account info).

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?

Explicitly lists when to use: audit, verify registration, check expiry, confirm setup. It provides clear context and example use cases. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, though the sibling tools provide implicit differentiation.

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