Add Custom Portal Domain

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

The description discloses that the tool returns DNS records (CNAME) that must be configured before verification, which adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it does not mention idempotency, error handling, or whether the tool can overwrite existing domains. Annotations are all false, so no contradiction.

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 concise with two main sentences in English plus Spanish bilingual repetition. It is front-loaded with the key purpose. The bilingual content is slightly redundant but does not detract significantly.

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 tool is simple but could benefit from mentioning next steps after adding (e.g., use frihet_portal_domain_verify to complete configuration). The output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description is adequate but not fully complete regarding the workflow.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters adequately. The description adds an example for the 'domain' parameter but does not mention 'workspaceId' or provide additional semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action (add), the resource (custom domain to Frihet client portal), and the purpose (white-label branding). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like frihet_portal_domain_verify and frihet_portal_domain_remove by noting that DNS records must be configured before verification.

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 usage for adding a custom domain, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., frihet_portal_domain_verify, frihet_portal_domain_remove). It also does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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