ise_openapi_cert_trusted_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. However, it says nothing about mutation vs. read-only, pagination behavior, return format, or any side effects. The tool name ending in '_list' and the description's 'Get list' wording imply a read operation, but that assumption is not explicitly stated, and no details about result size limits, paging defaults, or output structure are provided.

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 the prefix and endpoint reference. It front-loads the essential purpose. It's efficient with no filler, though it errs on the side of being too terse given the other gaps.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain more. It's a relatively simple list operation with 3 free parameters and no required fields, so the complexity is low. The description is arguably adequate for a list operation but deserves more given zero annotations and zero output schema, particularly around pagination and return value expectations.

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 33%, with only the deployment parameter having a description (which is rich and helpful, including name/slug/number formats and a pointer to ise_list_deployments). The page and size parameters have no descriptions. Description adds nothing beyond the schema for page/size. Baseline is 3 given partial coverage; the deployment param is well-documented in the schema itself, and the description adds no additional param info.

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 states 'Get list of all trusted certificates' with a specific resource (trusted certificates) and a clear verb (get list). It includes the API endpoint path. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools, the '[Certificates]' prefix and 'trusted' qualifier differentiate it from other cert tools like ise_openapi_cert_system_list and ise_openapi_cert_csr_list.

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 implies a read-only listing use case (get list of trusted certificates), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it vs. the trusted_get/delete/update/import siblings. No exclusions or alternatives are named. The purpose context is fairly clear that this is the listing operation among the trusted-cert cert family, but no explicit direction is given.

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