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

Discloses that the tool clones an order (mutation), returns a new order_id and DNS TXT records, and requires subsequent polling. This adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false) without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences with a conditional alternative. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded with the core action. No wasted words while providing thorough guidance.

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?

Covers what, when, prerequisites, workflow, and alternatives. References sibling tools and acknowledges the 24-hour purge constraint. Output schema exists, so return values are documented separately.

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?

The single parameter order_id is described in the schema and the description explains its role and ephemeral nature (purges after ~24h). With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3; the description adds valuable context.

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 tool renews a certificate by cloning a recent order, specifying both the verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool create_certificate by noting when to use each.

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 says when to use (with order_id) and when not to (call create_certificate instead). Includes prerequisites (order_id, Beacon purge after ~24h) and follow-up steps (poll check_certificate_propagation, finalize_certificate).

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