cloud_create_certificate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the creation action but fails to detail what happens to input data, any constraints (e.g., domain validation for managed certs), or the return format. The output schema exists but is not described.

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 with no wasted words. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail, making it less effective despite being concise.

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 6 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits parameter dependencies, required fields beyond name, and return value information, making it insufficient for an agent to safely invoke the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the 6 parameters, and the description only explains the 'type' parameter values. It does not clarify that certificate and private_key are needed for uploads, or domain_names for managed certs, leaving other parameters unexplained.

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's function: creating a TLS certificate by uploading or requesting a managed one. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cloud_delete_certificate, cloud_get_certificate, and cloud_list_certificates.

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 mentions two modes (uploaded and managed) but does not provide guidance on when to use each, nor does it cover prerequisites or alternatives. It offers basic context but lacks explicit usage instructions.

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