certificates_list_idp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses the permission requirement and the read-only nature of the operation ('List'). For a simple list tool, this is adequate transparency, though it does not elaborate on output format or any filtering semantics beyond 'available'.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the permission note is given immediately after. Every word adds value.

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 zero-parameter read-only list operation with no output schema, the description provides the essential context: what is listed and what permission is required. It is slightly sparse on what 'available' means and what fields the returned certificates contain, but this is not critical for correct invocation.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is effectively complete and there are no parameter details to clarify. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4; the description correctly adds no unnecessary parameter information.

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 states a specific verb ('list') and resource ('all available IdP certificates'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It is clearly distinguished from sibling certificate tools like certificates_download_idp or certificates_verify_idp by the action and scope.

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: use this to enumerate IdP certificates, and it states the required permission ('Read' on 'Infrastructure'). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5, but the context is sufficient for a zero-parameter listing tool.

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