Creates a new alias domain for a client in ISPConfig, linking additional domain names to an existing website so they resolve correctly.
Create a web alias domain
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| params | Yes | Alias domain params | |
| client_id | Yes | Client ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only indicates a creation action and says nothing about side effects, required parent resources, idempotency, or failure modes.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is concise, though it does not compensate for the lack of behavioral or parameter detail.
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?
This is a create operation with no annotations, no output schema, and an opaque nested params object; one sentence is wholly inadequate for correct invocation. An agent cannot determine required fields, return shape, or prerequisites.
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 description coverage is reported at 100%, so the baseline is 3. However, the params object is an unconstrained object with no property definitions, and the description adds no detail about what alias-domain parameters are actually expected.
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 ('Create') and resource ('a web alias domain'), so the basic purpose is clear. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like web_domain_add or web_subdomain_add, but the resource type is still identifiable.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as web_domain_add or web_subdomain_add. No prerequisites, such as an existing web domain, are mentioned, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.