pve_acme_cert_revoke

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explicitly labels as 'MUTATION: IRREVERSIBLE', states it is async (returns UPID), dry-run by default, and warns that a revoked cert cannot be un-revoked, requiring a new order to restore trust. Also mentions 'smoke-confirm' for testing.

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?

The description is extremely concise yet comprehensive. Every sentence adds critical information: mutation label, action, dry-run, async, irreversibility, alternative, confirm requirement, smoke-confirm. No fluff, well front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (mutation, irreversible, async, dry-run) and that an output schema exists (return values documented there), the description covers all necessary behavioral and usage context. Includes return type (UPID), consequence, alternative, and testing hint, making it fully complete for correct agent invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by emphasizing 'confirm=True to execute' and implying node default behavior ('omit to use configured default node'). This goes beyond the schema descriptions, warranting a 4.

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 action: 'revoke the node's ACME TLS certificate at the CA'. It specifies the resource (node's ACME TLS certificate), target (CA), and distinguishes from sibling tools like pve_acme_cert_order and pve_node_cert_delete. The verb 'revoke' is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides when to use (to revoke at CA) and when not to use (to fall back to self-signed without revoking, directing to pve_node_cert_delete). Also explains dry-run default and the need for confirm=True to execute, along with a smoke-confirm tip.

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