add_domain

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 discloses that the tool returns DNS records, but does not mention prerequisites (domain ownership), idempotency, whether overwriting occurs, or any side effects. For a mutation operation, this is insufficient.

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 two sentences (15 words), front-loads the action and the key output. Every word adds value; no redundancy or fluff.

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 simple add tool with two well-documented parameters, the description covers the core action and return value. It lacks context on prerequisites, limits, or the role of the sender parameter, but these are partially covered by the schema. Overall, fairly complete given the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter descriptions in the schema are adequate. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Add a sending domain') and the resource, and distinguishes from siblings like verify_domain or delete_domain by noting it returns DNS records for verification. No ambiguity.

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 implies the tool is the first step for adding a domain, and that DNS records must be published afterward. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., if domain already exists) or compare to alternatives like list_domains or get_domain. Still, the context is clear enough for typical use.

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