ssl_set_domain_acme_config

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 explicitly warns that 'confirm' must be true and that the operation 'writes ACME secrets,' and it notes that dns_environment tokens are redacted in logs. This is strong transparency for a mutation tool.

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 opens with a one-sentence purpose statement and then uses a compact per-parameter list. Every line adds meaningful semantic value, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 10-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers all parameter meanings, the main side effect (writing ACME secrets), and the confirm requirement. It lacks explicit sibling routing and details about overwrite/merge behavior, but an output schema exists to handle return values. Overall, it is near-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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining every parameter. It adds allowed values for provider and key_type, explains wildcard and DNS-01 behavior, identifies skip_dns_names and impersonation, and clarifies the confirm flag's mandatory, write-triggering role—far beyond the raw 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 states a specific verb ('Update') and a clear resource ('ACME settings for a domain'), with an explicit purpose ('before issuing or reissuing a cert'). The domain scoping clearly distinguishes it from server-level or read-only ACME sibling tools.

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 gives useful context that this is a pre-issuance/reissuance configuration step, implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools such as ssl_get_domain_acme_config for reading settings or ssl_set_server_acme_config for server-level configuration, nor does it state when not to use them.

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