enable_modsecurity_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely restates the action without explaining side effects, reversibility, required permissions, or the outcome of the operation. For a mutation tool, this is a minimal disclosure.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, earning top marks for efficiency.

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 (1 parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It doesn't mention whether the operation is idempotent, what errors might occur, or what the return value indicates. Still, it covers the core purpose sufficiently for a simple mutation.

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% — the 'domains' parameter is described as 'Comma-separated list of domains to enable ModSecurity on'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond this, matching the baseline score of 3.

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 'Enable ModSecurity for specific domains' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like enable_modsecurity (likely global) and disable_modsecurity_domain (opposite action). The scope is explicitly 'specific domains', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as enable_modsecurity or disable_modsecurity_domain. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or context that would help an agent choose this tool over others.

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