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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond a '[trust]' category tag — no mention of what a certificate represents, whether it is cached, or how the returned certificate is scoped.

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?

Extremely short, but brevity here reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication; there is no informational payload to front-load.

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?

No output schema, no parameter documentation, and a one-phrase description leave an agent unable to determine what this tool returns or how to supply a valid id. Completely inadequate for invocation.

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 required parameter 'id' has 0% schema description coverage and the description gives no hint about what kind of id it is (agent id, drift event id, certificate id, hash). With no annotation or schema help here, the description fully fails to compensate.

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 is a tag plus a restatement of the tool title ('[trust] Drift certificate'), with no verb indicating what operation occurs. An agent cannot tell whether it issues, fetches, or validates a certificate, nor how it differs from the sibling drift_check.

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 on when to use this versus alternatives, despite a directly related sibling (drift_check) plus trust_score and agents_reputation. Nothing indicates preconditions, context, or exclusions.

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