list_cert_certificates

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

With no annotations, the description clarifies that the tool returns only metadata and public key (not private key), a critical security behavior. It does not mention side effects, but as a read-only list operation, no further disclosure is expected.

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, no fluff, front-loaded with the action. Every word adds value.

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 parameterless list tool, the description fully covers purpose, scope, and return behavior. No output schema needed; the description suffices.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info because none exist, meeting the baseline for 0 parameters.

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 lists all SSL/TLS certificates in the account, distinguishing it from 'get_cert_certificate' by scope (list vs. single). It also specifies what is returned (metadata and public key) and what is not (private key).

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 use for listing all certificates, but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools like 'list_cert_auto_certificates' or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Usage context is clear but lacks exclusionary details.

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