ncloud_list_certificates

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already conveys that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the domain ('registered SSL/TLS certificates') and filter capability, but does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as pagination, sorting, or response format. This is consistent with the annotation but does not go beyond it significantly, matching the '3' benchmark.

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 short sentences with no fluff. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second succinctly lists the filter parameters. Every word 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with no required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main action and filters adequately. It does not explain the return value structure, but the tool name and description make it obvious that a list of certificates is returned. Given its simplicity, it is near-complete, but could slightly benefit from mentioning that all parameters are optional for an unfiltered list, which the schema already implies.

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 each parameter (certificateName, certificateNo, instanceNo) already described as a filter. The description reiterates these filter fields but adds no new semantic meaning, such as how filters combine or whether they are mutually exclusive. Thus it provides no extra value over the schema, warranting the baseline 3.

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 tool lists all registered SSL/TLS certificates in Certificate Manager, using the specific verb 'List' and identifying the resource and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling certificate tools like issue_private_certificate, register_external_certificate, and delete_certificate by its focus on listing registered certificates.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when listing registered SSL/TLS certificates in Certificate Manager. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., distinguishing from ncloud_pca_list_cas for private CA certificates), so it misses the explicit exclusion/alternative guidance for a 5.

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