Delete Domain

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description still adds value by disclosing a side effect not in the annotations: 'flushes MCP cache.' It doesn't cover permission requirements or undo/recovery, so it stops short of full disclosure.

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?

Three labeled bullets (Purpose/Inputs/Side effects) with zero filler and the critical destructive warning front-loaded. 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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies purpose, input, and a non-obvious side effect. Reversibility and permission requirements are absent but are largely implied by the destructiveHint annotation, so it is nearly complete.

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 single parameter already carries a description ('Domain name to delete'). The description only restates the parameter name, adding no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Delete a domain') and even names the exact endpoint (DELETE /v1/domains/{key}). The name plus purpose make it unambiguous versus siblings like domains.create, domains.update, and domains.get.

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?

It names the required input and flags the operation as destructive, which implies when to use it, but it offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternatives. The delete semantics are self-evident from the name, so the gap is modest.

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