ncloud_delete_certificate

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true. The description adds context: 'Permanently delete,' dependency checks, and the confirm flag. However, idempotentHint=true in annotations contradicts the destructive nature; the description does not clarify idempotency (e.g., behavior if certificate already deleted).

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?

Extremely concise: one line for purpose, one for precondition, one for execution. No redundant words, uses emoji for visibility. Every sentence is necessary and 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?

For a destructive tool with annotations, the description covers preconditions and the confirm safety mechanism. However, it lacks post-execution information (e.g., no error handling, no confirmation of success) and no output schema. Slightly incomplete but adequate.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions, and the description adds value: confirm must be true to execute, certificateNo source ('from ncloud_list_certificates'), and certificateName must match exactly. This extends beyond 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Permanently delete a registered certificate.' It specifies the verb (delete) and resource (registered certificate), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like ncloud_register_external_certificate, ncloud_pca_* (CA/end certs), and ncloud_edge_delete_certificate.

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?

Provides explicit precondition ('Ensure it is not in use by any Load Balancer, CDN+, or Global Edge') and execution requirement ('Set confirm=true to execute'). However, it does not explicitly compare with other delete certificate tools (e.g., when to use this vs. PCA or Edge variants), leaving some ambiguity.

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