renew_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It describes the financial nature ('This is a financial operation'), the use of account credit, cost in pennies, and includes 'action=RENEW'. However, it does not disclose potential consequences (e.g., irreversible charge, success/failure behavior) or any required permissions.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence adds essential information without redundancy. It is concise and well-structured.

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 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the cost constraint and prerequisite check. However, it leaves 'reason' unexplained and does not describe the return value or error scenarios, which limits completeness for autonomous agent use.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'cost' is in pennies (USD cents) and must match the renewal price. However, it does not explain the 'domain' or 'reason' parameters beyond their names; 'reason' could benefit from clarification (e.g., required format, purpose).

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 tool 'Renew a domain using account credit', with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like register_domain and transfer_domain, which are for different domain lifecycle steps.

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 explicitly instructs to use check_availability to get the current price before renewing, and notes that cost must exactly match the renewal price. This provides clear context of when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives beyond the referenced check.

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