pve_acme_cert_order

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

Discloses mutation, async nature, return of UPID, dry-run behavior, forced overwrite option, safety (failure leaves cert untouched), effect on pveproxy reload, and revert path. With no annotations, description fully covers behavioral traits.

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?

Packed with information but all sentences are relevant and concise. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but no superfluous content.

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 purpose, execution modes, risk, effects, and alternatives. Output schema exists so return value not needed. Lacks explicit mention of prerequisite (node must have ACME domains configured) but implied by 'configured ACME domains'.

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 has 100% coverage for 4 params; description adds context: node default behavior, force overwriting, confirm as dry-run vs execute, proximo_target for multi-target routing, enhancing understanding 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 it orders a NEW ACME TLS certificate for the node's ACME domains, uses specific verbs like 'order' and 'MUTATION', and distinguishes from siblings like pve_node_cert_upload and pve_node_cert_delete via risk level and purpose.

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?

Explicitly says dry-run by default, confirm=True to execute, contrasts with pve_node_cert_upload (HIGH risk) and pve_node_cert_delete (revert), provides smoke-confirm advice for testing.

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