Renew Domain

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

The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing that this is a financial operation that will charge money, that it requires user confirmation, and that it is asynchronous (returns an operationId to poll). It also explains the risk of double renewals and how the 'currentExpirationDate' parameter mitigates it.

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 structured with a clear statement of purpose, followed by important warnings and instructions. While not extremely concise, every sentence serves a purpose—no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action and warning.

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 the tool's complexity (financial transaction, async operation, required parameter validation), the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, prerequisites (get_domain), user confirmation, async polling with 'get_async_operation', and safety measures. No output schema exists, but the return value (operationId) is mentioned.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the role of each parameter. For 'currentExpirationDate', it clarifies it must match the actual expiration date to prevent double renewals. It also restates the range for 'years' (1-10). This adds context beyond the schema descriptions.

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's purpose: 'Renew an existing domain registration.' It uses a specific verb ('renew') and resource ('domain registration'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'register_domain', 'transfer_domain', and 'restore_domain' by focusing on the renewal of an existing domain.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: use 'get_domain' first to retrieve the current expiration date, and always confirm with the user by showing the domain name, renewal years, and estimated cost. It also explains when not to use (avoid accidental double renewals via the 'currentExpirationDate' parameter).

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