createDomainAdd a custom domain to a Cloady app by specifying workspace, app, host, and optional port or redirect settings.
Create a new domain for an app
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env | No | ||
| region | No | ||
| appSlug | Yes | ||
| requestBody | No | The JSON request body. | |
| workspaceSlug | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description says 'Create a new domain', which is a non-destructive action, but the annotations declare destructiveHint: true. This is a direct contradiction and could mislead about whether the operation may destroy existing data or configuration.
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. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful context that could clarify parameter roles or side effects.
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 description omits critical context such as the need for a request body, the meaning of isPrimary, potential side effects, or what happens after creation. It is insufficient for a tool with a nested requestBody object and five parameters.
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 description provides no explanation of the parameters beyond the schema itself. Fields like workspaceSlug, appSlug, env, region, isPrimary, and redirectTo are left entirely unexplained, and the schema description coverage is only 20%, so the description adds little to parameter understanding.
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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'domain for an app', making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like deleteDomain and updateDomain by specifying the creation action.
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 implies that this tool should be used when creating a new domain, but it does not explicitly explain when to prefer it over related domain tools or provide any context about prerequisites. The guidance is inferred from the name and verb rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.