acedatacloud_update_site_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Patch' conveys a mutating operation, and 'hostname and kind are immutable' discloses a key constraint; the confirm parameter is described in the schema. It does not discuss auth or side effects, but the essential behavior is disclosed without contradiction.

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 entire description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds meaning, and it communicates action, target, and constraints economically.

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 a small schema, 100% parameter descriptions, and an output schema, the one-line description is largely sufficient to understand the tool's purpose and key constraint. It slightly under-specifies usage context and the confirm gate, but the schema compensates for the confirm behavior.

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 each parameter already has a clear description ('Replacement tags', 'Must be true to update', 'Replacement metadata', 'Domain UUID'). The description adds only a general notion of mutability and immutability, not new parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Patch' against 'mutable custom-domain metadata', clearly indicating the action and target. It distinguishes this update tool from sibling create/list/delete domain tools by explicitly noting hostname and kind are immutable.

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?

It states the intended use is patching mutable custom-domain metadata and flags hostname/kind as immutable, which implies when not to use this tool for those fields. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or provide exclusions, but the context is clear enough from the description and sibling names.

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