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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond them: it does not say whether removal is reversible, whether DNS/verification records are cleaned up, whether the domain is detached only from the deployment or deleted outright, or what permissions are required.

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 zero filler, appropriate for a two-parameter tool. It is arguably too terse for a destructive operation, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Annotations carry the destructive safety profile and the schema fully documents both parameters, so the minimum is met. However, for an irreversible removal the description omits any warning, side-effect disclosure, or post-removal state, leaving ambiguity about whether the domain is detached or destroyed.

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% with both required UUID parameters documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format, ordering, or lookup guidance beyond what the schema already states.

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 (Remove) and resource (custom domain) and clarifies scope as removal from a deployment, so an agent can distinguish it from nexusai_domains_add/list/verify. It does not explicitly name those siblings or contrast behavior, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus nexusai_domains_verify or a hypothetical domain deletion, and no preconditions or ordering constraints are given. An agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and siblings.

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