Remove Custom Portal Domain

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that the portal reverts to default subdomain, which is useful but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like immediate effect, reversibility, or any impact on client access. No contradiction with annotations.

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, consisting of two sentences in English and Spanish, with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource, and includes an example. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simplicity (single parameter, no output schema, annotations present), the description provides sufficient context: what the tool does, the parameter example, and the outcome. It could mention immediate effect or error cases, but it is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

There is only one parameter 'domain', and the input schema provides a description. The tool description adds an example value 'domain='portal.miempresa.com'', which clarifies the expected format beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds value with an example, justifying a score above baseline 3.

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 explicitly states the action 'Remove' and the resource 'custom domain from the Frihet client portal', and explains the effect: 'The portal will revert to the default Frihet subdomain.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'frihet_portal_domain_add' and 'frihet_portal_domain_verify'.

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?

While the description implies usage (removing a custom domain after it has been added), it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites (e.g., domain must exist, or that removal affects active portal). The context is implied from the tool name and sibling tools, but no direct 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' statements.

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