Retrieve details of a Global Edge certificate slot and the certificates provisioned in it. Provide slotId with optional pageNo and offset to paginate results.
Get details of a Global Edge certificate slot (certificates provisioned in the slot)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| offset | No | Items per page (default 15) | |
| pageNo | No | Page number (default 1) | |
| slotId | Yes | Certificate slot ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Input schema / properties / certificateIdRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Certificate ID to query",
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / properties / offsetAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Items per page (default 15)",
+ "type": "number"
+}Input schema / properties / pageNoAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Page number (default 1)",
+ "type": "number"
+}Input schema / properties / slotIdAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Certificate slot ID",
+ "type": "number"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "certificateId"
-]New value: +[
+ "slotId"
+]v1.10.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds only the conceptual clarification of what a 'slot' contains; it does not disclose pagination behavior despite offset/pageNo parameters, nor any auth or scoping requirements. With annotations covering safety, this is a minimal but acceptable addition.
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 wasted words, stating the verb and resource immediately. The parenthetical adds specificity compactly.
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 getter with a fully documented schema and a readOnlyHint, this is nearly sufficient. However, with no output schema the description does not hint at the return shape or clarify the slot-vs-certificate relationship, leaving a small gap.
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%, so slotId, offset, and pageNo are all documented in the schema (including defaults). The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is the correct baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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?
States a specific verb (get) and resource (Global Edge certificate slot) and clarifies via the parenthetical that the slot holds provisioned certificates. However, the name says 'get_certificate' while the description describes a slot, a minor mismatch, and there is no differentiation from siblings like ncloud_edge_list_certificates or ncloud_edge_add_certificate_to_slot.
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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives among the many edge certificate siblings (list_certificates, provision_certificate, get_purge_request, etc.). An agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.