get_certificates

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'lists' (a read operation) but does not mention any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or behavior when no policies exist. Minimal beyond purpose.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose with no wasted words. It earns its place.

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 no output schema and low complexity, the description is fairly complete: it states what is listed (subjects, issuers, CAs). It could mention if the result is a list or single item, or behavior on empty results, but it is adequate for a simple list tool.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4 per scoring rules. The description does not need to add parameter meaning as there are none.

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 identifies the tool as listing certificate automation policies, specifying the listed aspects (subjects, ACME issuers, CAs). The verb 'list' and resource 'certificate automation policies' are specific and unambiguous, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on routes, servers, or configuration.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or exclusions. As a simple list tool with no parameters, usage is implied but not elaborated. A 3 is appropriate as it covers the basic context without providing comparative guidance.

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