get_cert_certificate

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is already known. The description adds the useful detail that the private key is not returned, which is a behavioral boundary beyond the annotation. However, it doesn't disclose other potential behaviors like error conditions or whether the certificate must be active.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the important exclusion (no private key) is stated concisely. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what is returned (metadata and public key) and what is not (private key). The only minor gap is not describing the exact response structure, but no output schema exists and the tool is simple enough that this is a small omission.

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 single parameter certificate_id is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 retrieves details of a specific certificate by ID, distinguishing it from list operations like list_cert_certificates. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the verb 'get' plus 'specific' and 'by ID' makes the purpose clear.

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 implies this is for fetching a single certificate's details, contrasting with list tools, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives or mention any exclusions. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer usage, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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