acedatacloud_delete_site_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It does not mention that unbinding is destructive, potentially irreversible, or that it requires confirmation via the 'confirm' parameter. The schema hints at confirmation but the description itself omits behavioral implications.

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 unnecessary words. It is direct and to the point, well-structured for a simple tool.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description lacks details about outcomes, reversibility, or error conditions. It is minimal but not entirely inadequate given the schema's mention of confirmation. However, a bit more context about the unbinding process could improve completeness.

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 already provides descriptions for both parameters (confirm: 'Must be true to unbind.', domain_id: 'Domain UUID.'). The tool description adds no extra meaning about the parameters, so it does not improve upon the schema's coverage, which is already high. Baseline 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 'Unbind a custom domain.' clearly states the action (unbind) and the resource (custom domain), distinguishing it from sibling tools like verify, check, create, and update site domain. It is specific and 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, no prerequisites, and no context about the confirm parameter. It lacks any direction on scenarios where unbinding is appropriate or required.

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