Resend contact validation email

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

The description explicitly warns that every call sends mail, highlighting the side-effectful nature. It also states the return of validation state. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false).

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 compact and well-organized: action, usage guidance, and identification note. No fluff or redundancy.

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 output schema exists, the description covers the return value (validation state), usage conditions, and side effects. No missing critical information for an agent to call this 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?

The parameter body.contactsDetails is fully described as the list of contacts to send to, with the note that they are identified as returned by eurodns_domain_get. This gives both meaning and source context beyond the raw schema.

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 (sends email), the target (contacts in body.contactsDetails), the content (validation link), and the return (validation state). It distinguishes this tool from siblings by referencing eurodns_domain_get as the source for contact identification.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when a registrant validation is pending or about to expire') and when-not-to-use ('do not use it as a check, since every call sends mail'). This is directly actionable for an agent.

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