Install SSL

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

The description discloses significant behavioral details beyond the annotations: the installation runs asynchronously in the background, status is checked via 'Get SSL status', an active certificate does not block reinstallation, and the exact 422 error conditions are enumerated. It also notes the prerequisite for custom certificates (must be uninstalled first). This goes well beyond the basic annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and provides an agent with a clear model of the tool's runtime behavior and failure modes.

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 reasonably concise for the amount of information it conveys. It front-loads the core action in the first sentence, then provides async behavior and error conditions in subsequent sentences. Each clause serves a purpose (background execution, status reporting, reinstall semantics, 422 cases). It could be tightened slightly, but there is no filler or redundancy.

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 write operation with no output schema, this description is exceptionally complete. It covers the asynchronous nature, how to obtain the result (via Get SSL status), the reinstallation scenario, and all documented 422 error cases, including the prerequisite of uninstalling a custom certificate. There is no missing information an agent would need to call the tool correctly or interpret the outcome.

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 input schema already documents both parameters (domain and username) with descriptions. The tool description adds minimal extra semantics: it mentions 'the website' and 'free subdomains', which indirectly relates to the domain, but it doesn't elaborate on parameter formats, relationships, or validation rules. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 action: 'Requests a lifetime SSL certificate for the website.' It specifies the resource (website), the operation (request/install), and the result type (lifetime certificate). It differentiates from siblings like hosting_getSSLStatusV1 (which reports status) and hosting_uninstallSSLV1 (which removes) by naming the action and referencing 'Get SSL status' as a follow-up. The purpose is unambiguous and distinct.

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 gives strong usage guidance by listing conditions where the tool returns 422 (free subdomains, when an installation is already in progress, revoked certificates, or when a custom certificate is installed). It also explains that an active certificate does not block a new request, so reinstallation is possible. While it doesn't explicitly say 'use this instead of X', it effectively tells the agent when NOT to use it and clarifies the reinstall workflow, which is sufficient context for selection.

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