opn_list_acme_certs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states it returns a dict with 'rows' and 'rowCount', which implies no side effects for a list operation. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or safe, nor does it disclose authentication needs or rate limits. The description is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 two sentences plus a note and return format. It is clear and front-loaded with the core purpose. While it could be slightly more concise by integrating the usage guidance, it is not verbose and 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (though not shown), the description provides a summary of the return type. It mentions the required plugin, which is important context. However, it does not explain the effect of the 'search' and 'limit' parameters, nor does it mention potential pagination or other caveats. The description is adequate but incomplete regarding parameter behavior.

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 0%, meaning the description does not explain the parameters 'search' and 'limit'. The description adds no meaning beyond what the input schema already provides. This is a significant gap, as the agent must infer parameter usage from the schema alone.

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 explicitly states it lists ACME certificates and their status, and explains what information can be obtained (expiry, renewal, domains). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools, as no other sibling is specifically for ACME certificate listing.

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 provides clear usage guidance: 'Use this when you need to check certificate expiry dates, renewal status, or which domains have ACME certificates configured.' It also mentions a prerequisite (ACME client plugin required). There are no explicit exclusions or alternatives, but given the sibling tools list, this is the only tool for this purpose.

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