acedatacloud_verify_site_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It indicates the operation is a 'probe' (suggesting non-mutating), but it does not explicitly disclose side-effect-free behavior, potential latency, or the confirmation requirement for the HTTPS probe that appears in the schema. This is a thin description for a tool with no annotation safety signals.

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, short sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The output schema and parameter schema cover the mechanical details, and the description gives a reasonable high-level purpose. However, the lack of differentiation from a similarly named sibling and the absence of any usage guidance leave a completeness gap for an agent deciding between verify and check tools.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptive parameter texts for both 'domain_id' and 'confirm'. The description itself adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so the 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 states a specific action ('Run the end-to-end DNS/TLS/site health probe') with a clear resource and scope. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling tool acedatacloud_check_site_domain, which may be similar in purpose, so it misses the differentiation required for a 5.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like acedatacloud_check_site_domain or acedatacloud_get_site_domain. The description only states what the tool does, with no context about appropriate scenarios or exclusions.

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