delete_certificate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The word 'permanently' explicitly indicates an irreversible destructive operation, which is key transparency. However, it does not disclose potential failure conditions (e.g., certificate in use), required permissions, or side effects beyond the deletion.

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 that immediately conveys the action and irreversibility. No redundant or extraneous text.

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 simple delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately captures purpose and key behavior. It is slightly incomplete in not addressing error cases or post-deletion effects, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly in most contexts.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage by documenting 'name' as 'The name of the certificate file to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond confirming the resource type, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('Arc certificate') with the adverb 'permanently' clarifying scope. It clearly distinguishes from other certificate tools (list, get, import, create, exchange) that do not delete.

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 provides no guidance on when this tool should be used versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. It does not mention situations where deletion is not appropriate.

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