ssl_expiry_check

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, fully covering safety and idempotency. The description adds output details (cert name, expiry date, days remaining) but no additional behavioral traits beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences: purpose, output, usage advice, then a parameter line. It is front-loaded with the key purpose and contains no superfluous words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter with schema and default, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary context: what it does, what it returns, when to use it, and the parameter meaning.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'days' parameter, but the description provides a meaningful explanation: 'Check certs expiring within this many days'. This adds value beyond the schema's default value and type.

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 checks SSL certificate expiry within a configurable number of days. It uses a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('SSL certificates'), and the '[READ]' prefix reinforces its read-only nature. This adequately distinguishes it from siblings like 'ssl_list' which lists all 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 advises to 'Run regularly to prevent outages', providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, such as using 'ssl_list' for a full certificate list.

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