panelica_ssl_post_v1_ssl_domains_domain_id_upload

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

The description only says 'Uploads', implying a write operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it replaces existing certificates, authentication requirements, or whether it is destructive. No annotations are present to compensate.

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 short (2 sentences) and front-loaded, but it omits critical details such as request body format. It is adequately concise but incomplete.

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 the absence of annotations and output schema, and the complexity of uploading a certificate (requiring key, format, etc.), the description is severely lacking. It does not explain prerequisites, success/failure behavior, or how to provide the certificate and key.

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 description does not add meaning to the single parameter (domain_id) beyond what the schema already provides. More importantly, the description mentions uploading a certificate and key, but the schema only allows domain_id and rejects additional properties, creating confusion about how to provide the actual certificate and key.

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 'Uploads a custom SSL certificate and key', specifying the verb and the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'issue' and 'renew' which deal with Let's Encrypt certificates.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., issue vs renew). There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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