apple_revoke_certificate

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

The description fails to disclose that revoking a certificate is irreversible and likely invalidates associated services or apps. With no annotations, the tool's behavioral traits are inadequately described, especially given the destructive nature of the operation.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, but it is too terse to be fully informative. It earns a middle score because while it is concise, it sacrifices necessary detail.

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 that the tool performs a destructive action with one parameter and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It should clarify the consequences of revocation and any required permissions, but it omits these critical details.

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% with a minimal description for the only parameter ('Certificate ID'). The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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') and the resource ('a certificate'), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like apple_create_certificate and apple_list_certificates. However, it lacks specificity about the type of certificate or any additional context that would elevate clarity to a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as apple_delete_profile for related resources. There are no prerequisites, warnings, or notes on side effects, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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