certificate_create_letsencrypt

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

Beyond annotations (write operation, not idempotent), description adds async nature, immediate return with 'CREATING' status, polling queue_active, and prerequisite that site must be accessible. No contradictions.

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?

Very concise: three sentences with clear sections (description, async note, requirements, write confirm). No wasted words.

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?

Covers key aspects: async workflow, polling, DNS requirement, confirmation flag. Missing potential error scenarios or rate limits, but sufficient for a complex tool without output schema.

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 already covers 75% of parameters well. Description adds critical contextual hint that confirm must be true to execute, which is not obvious from schema alone.

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?

Clearly states it issues a Let's Encrypt SSL certificate for an existing site, distinguishing from listing certificates or updating SSL. Specifies async behavior upfront.

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?

Tells when to use (issuing certs) and mentions requirement of publicly accessible DNS, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like site_ssl_update or DNS-01 validation options.

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