search_certificates

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

Without annotations, the description does some work: it discloses paging via has_more and notes that no unbounded COUNT is supported. However, it does not mention auth needs, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. It adds value beyond the schema but is not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose and criteria, second adds key paging behavior. No wasted words, front-loaded with 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?

Given 8 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description covers pagination but lacks detail on parameter interactions and result structure. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 names most parameters (domain, CN, issuer, SAN, validity, wildcard) but does not explain page and limit or how parameters combine (e.g., AND/OR). With 0% schema coverage, it provides some but not full meaning.

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 tool searches the CT certificate index by specified criteria (domain, CN, issuer, SAN, validity, wildcard status), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_certificate (single certificate) and get_domain_certificates (domain-specific). The mention of pagination further differentiates it.

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 use for searching by various fields, but does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like get_certificate or get_domain_certificates. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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