Update HTTPS configuration for a website to enable or disable secure connections, set certificates and private keys, and adjust HSTS, HTTP/3, and port settings.
Update HTTPS configuration
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hsts | No | ||
| type | Yes | ||
| http3 | No | ||
| enable | Yes | ||
| algorithm | No | ||
| websiteId | Yes | ||
| httpConfig | No | ||
| httpsPorts | No | ||
| privateKey | No | ||
| certificate | No | ||
| hstsIncludeSubDomains | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers nothing. It does not disclose that this is a mutation, what permissions are required, whether certificate/key changes trigger a reload or downtime, or what happens to unspecified settings.
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?
It is only four words, so there is no verbosity, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded because nothing is said.
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 an 11-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot safely invoke this tool from the information given.
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 description coverage is 0% across 11 parameters, and the description compensates for none of them. Critical fields like type, algorithm, httpConfig, privateKey, certificate, and httpsPorts are entirely unexplained in both schema and description.
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 'Update HTTPS configuration' essentially restates the tool name (update_https) without adding specificity. It does not say what aspect of HTTPS is configured, nor distinguish it from siblings such as apply_ssl, obtain_ssl, or update_nginx_conf.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many SSL/HTTPS siblings. The agent has no basis for choosing this over apply_ssl or update_nginx_conf.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.