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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds genuine value beyond these by disclosing the exact side effects: detaching both apex and www variants from Vercel and resetting redirectMode to none. It does not mention auth requirements, but the destructive scope is well disclosed.

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 sentences, no filler, and the primary action is front-loaded ahead of the side-effect detail. Every clause 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 destructive single-param mutation with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description supplies what an agent needs: the target site, the exact artifacts removed, and the redirect reset. Only permissions/preconditions are unaddressed.

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?

Only one parameter exists and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains 'id'. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is the expected baseline when the schema carries the load.

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 and resource ('Remove the custom domain from the active site'), which reads distinctly from the set_domain/set_domain_redirect_mode siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiating by name.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The agent must infer that this is the inverse of set_domain, and there is no mention of prerequisites or alternatives such as set_domain_redirect_mode.

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