site_ssl_update

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and non-readOnly. Description adds confirm requirement and API mapping, but doesn't detail side effects of detaching or toggling flags.

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 concise sentences front-loaded with purpose, usage scenario, and critical instruction. 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 essential use case and detach mechanism, but lacks explanation of boolean flags, return value, or behavior of dry_run. With 9 parameters and no output schema, more detail would help.

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 coverage is 78% (high), so baseline is 3. Description adds minor clarification for certificate_id null but doesn't explain boolean flags beyond schema.

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 actions (attach, replace, detach) and resource (SSL certificate on a site), distinguishing it from sibling tools like site_update and certificate_create_letsencrypt.

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?

Provides explicit usage context for wildcard flow and detachment (certificate_id=null), plus confirm requirement. However, lacks explicit contrast with alternative SSL tools.

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