connect_godaddy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a critical behavioral trait: 'the API key and secret will be visible in the AI conversation context.' It also states access behavior around sessions. It does not detail side effects such as overwriting existing DNS provider settings, but the key security warning is valuable.

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 and front-loaded: the core purpose comes first, followed by the security warning and access requirements. The ACCESS block is slightly dense, but every sentence contributes necessary information with no filler.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operational context: what the tool does, the sensitive credential visibility risk, and the required authentication flow. It does not describe the success response or what happens after connection, but these are secondary given the input schema and clarity of purpose.

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 description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has a clear description: 'Domain ID', 'GoDaddy API key', 'GoDaddy API secret'. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific action and resource: 'Connect GoDaddy API credentials to a domain for automated DNS record management.' It is immediately distinguishable from similarly named siblings like connect_cloudflare and connect_dns_provider because GoDaddy is named explicitly.

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 provides access prerequisites, explaining that a Proof account is needed and offering two paths: setting PROOF_API_KEY or using start_login to open a session before calling the tool. It lacks an explicit when-to-use versus alternatives statement, but the GoDaddy-specific wording makes the intended use clear.

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