tls.cert-info

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It notes 'Active probe' implying network impact, and 'SSRF-guarded' suggesting safety, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication, or potential destruction. Adequate but minimal.

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, front-loaded with primary action, followed by a comprehensive list of output fields. No superfluous words.

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 no output schema, the description enumerates all relevant certificate details (protocol, cipher, chain, expiry, etc.), fully informing the agent of returned data. Context for usage is clear.

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 covers host with description 'Hostname or IP.' and port with constraints but no description. Description adds no parameter-specific details beyond schema. Schema coverage is partial (port description missing), but description does not 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?

Description uses specific verb 'Open a live TLS connection' and resource 'host certificate', listing numerous output fields. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like dns.lookup or domain.whois by focusing on live TLS probing and certificate details.

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?

Description states use cases 'Cert-expiry monitoring, TLS audits' and notes 'Active probe; SSRF-guarded'. It implies when to use but does not explicitly exclude alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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