Resend contact validation email

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

Annotations already establish that the tool is not read-only and not destructive, but the description adds useful behavioral context: it sends a new email to contacts and returns validation state. It does not detail external side effects or rate-limit implications, but the core behavior is clearly disclosed.

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?

Two tight sentences: the first explains the mechanism and return value, the second gives a concrete trigger and a pointer to a sibling tool. Every sentence earns its place and the key purpose is front-loaded.

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 is complete for selection and invocation: it explains the action, when to use it, what input format to expect, and what the return provides. The output schema exists, so the agent can rely on it for return structure, and no critical guidance is missing.

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%, and the body's description adds cross-tool semantics by explaining that contactsDetails should be identified as eurodns_domain_get returns them. This helps an agent construct correct input beyond the bare field names email and phone.

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 (sends a new validation email to a domain's contacts) and a specific resource (contact validation links), and also notes it returns the validation state. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like eurodns_ssl_resend_approver_email.

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?

Gives explicit guidance: use it when a contact validation is pending or expiring soon, and points to eurodns_domain_search as the way to find such domains. This tells an agent both when to invoke the tool and how to identify qualifying inputs.

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