Uninstall SSL

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

Annotations already signal destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds substantial context: exactly what is removed or canceled, the consequence of serving plain HTTP until reinstall, the immediate status change, and the safe no-op behavior when no certificate exists. This goes well beyond the annotation flags and contains no contradiction.

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?

Three compact sentences front-load the main effect, then state consequences and error conditions. Every sentence carries necessary information with no filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what happens, the resulting state, idempotency, and error conditions. An agent can safely decide when to call it and what to expect afterward.

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 100%, so the baseline applies. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema; 'username' remains generic in both places. 'Domain' is adequately described as a domain name, and no critical ambiguity is introduced.

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 opens with a specific action and resource: 'Removes the SSL certificate assigned to the website.' It then enumerates the full scope of the operation—turning off HTPS redirect and canceling pending installation retries—making it clearly distinct from sibling install, status, and redirect-toggle tools.

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 clear operational context: expected post-call status, safe repetition when no certificate is assigned, and explicit 422 error cases for free subdomains and in-progress installations. It stops short of naming alternative sibling tools (e.g., hosting_toggleHTTPSRedirectV1) for explicit when-to-use-versus routing.

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