listCertStatusesList TLS certificate statuses for application domains to verify expiry and validity.
List TLS certificate statuses for app domains
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env | No | ||
| region | No | ||
| appSlug | Yes | ||
| workspaceSlug | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'List' action aligns with a non-destructive read operation. No additional behavioral disclosures are needed.
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, concise sentence with no redundant information. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.
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 description provides a high-level purpose but does not specify the output structure or any additional context such as whether only current statuses are returned or historical data. Given the simplicity, this is acceptable but not fully complete.
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 schema provides no descriptions for any of the four parameters, and the tool description does not compensate by explaining them. Parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but env and region remain ambiguous without further 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 action ('List') and the resource ('TLS certificate statuses for app domains'), which is specific and distinguishes it from related tools like listAppDomains or listWorkspaceDomains.
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 is clear about what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. There is no direct comparison with sibling tools, so the agent must infer the appropriate context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.