tls.cert-info

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It notes 'Active probe; SSRF-guarded' but lacks details on error handling (e.g., timeouts, unreachable hosts), rate limits, or permissions. It partially fulfills the burden but could be more thorough.

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, dense sentence that front-loads the action and then enumerates attributes. It is efficient but could be easier to parse with bullet points or structure. No wasted 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?

For a live probing tool with no output schema, the description covers many return fields (protocol, cipher, chain validity, subject, issuer, dates, fingerprint, SANs). However, it doesn't explain the output format or structure, leaving some ambiguity.

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 50% with minimal property descriptions. The description adds meaning by listing expected parameters (host, port) and clarifying their roles (hostname/IP, port number). It compensates for the sparse schema.

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 verb ('open' a live TLS connection) and resource ('return its certificate'), listing many specific attributes. It distinguishes itself from siblings like dns.lookup or domain.whois by focusing on certificate details and active probing.

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 mentions 'Cert-expiry monitoring, TLS audits' which implies usage contexts. It also notes 'Active probe; SSRF-guarded' but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, though the sibling list gives context.

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