delete_ssl_certificate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It identifies the operation as delete/uninstall, indicating destructiveness, but does not mention side effects such as the domain losing HTTPS protection, irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens to the underlying certificate.

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 that wastes no words. It conveys the essential action and target effectively.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter fully documented in the schema, and the description states its purpose clearly. However, for a destructive operation, the lack of behavioral context (side effects, reversibility) leaves the description incomplete for an agent to fully understand the implications.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with a description for the 'domain' parameter. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond restating 'from a domain', so the baseline of 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 explicitly states the action (delete/uninstall) and the resource (SSL certificate) with a clear target (domain). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like install_ssl_certificate and list_ssl_certificates, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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?

The description implies usage through its verb and resource but does not provide explicit context about when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. For a delete operation, this is adequate but not thorough.

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