list_custom_certificates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. 'List' conveys a read-only operation, but the description does not mention pagination, response contents, ordering, or any permission prerequisites. This is adequate but minimal.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the action, resource, and scope.

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 one-parameter list operation with a self-explanatory name, the description plus schema is almost sufficient. It omits response format details, but an agent can correctly select and invoke the tool with the provided zone_id.

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?

The only parameter, zone_id, is fully described in the schema at 100% coverage. The description repeats the zone scoping but adds no parameter syntax or format details beyond the 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('custom SSL certificates') scoped to 'a zone,' making the tool's purpose immediately clear. This also distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_certificate_packs and list_client_certificates, which target different certificate categories.

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?

It clearly implies the tool is for retrieving user-uploaded custom SSL certificates for a particular zone and requires a zone_id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the scope wording is clear enough for basic selection.

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