acedatacloud_create_site_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It only states a high-level action without disclosing behavioral traits like the confirmation requirement, side effects, or failure conditions. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 zero fluff, which is efficient. However, it is so brief that it omits critical usage and behavioral information, making it under-specified rather than purely concise. It earns a 4 for brevity but loses a point for missing substance.

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 tool with 6 parameters and an output schema, this description is insufficient. It fails to mention the confirm requirement, the kind parameter, or any operational context. While the output schema may clarify return values, the description lacks necessary context for proper invocation.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to parameters, but the schema already explains each field (e.g., 'Must be true to bind domain' for confirm). No compensation needed.

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 'Bind a custom domain to a site' is specific and clearly states the action (bind) and resource (custom domain to a site). It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like verify/check/update/delete, which all relate to domains. The verb+resource structure is precise.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool vs alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., domain verification), or the requirement that the 'confirm' parameter must be true. It gives no context for selecting this tool among related domain operations.

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