ecp_domains_add_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mutation (adding a domain) but doesn't mention potential side effects, DNS implications, ownership requirements, or whether the operation is reversible. The description is too thin to inform an agent about behavioral consequences.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could add a bit more context without becoming bloated.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the role of dns_server, what happens after adding a domain, or how to verify success. An agent would need to guess at important details.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only explains the 'domain' parameter implicitly ('additional domain') but says nothing about 'dns_server', which is a nullable string with unclear purpose. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's bare parameter names.

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 verb ('Add') and resource ('additional (addon) domain to this account'), which clearly identifies the operation. It distinguishes from siblings like ecp_domains_add_subdomain and ecp_domains_list_additional, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ecp_domains_add_subdomain or ecp_domains_list_all. The description implies usage for adding an addon domain but provides no context about prerequisites, validation, or when not to use it.

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