set_primary_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the mutation ('set as primary') and says nothing about side effects, reversibility, or whether the domain must be in a specific state.

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 a single clear sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately minimal for the action it names.

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 complexity of domain management and the existence of many related sibling tools, the description lacks essential context about what 'primary' means, when the operation is valid, and what the consequences are. An output schema exists, so return values are not the gap, but prerequisites and effects are unaddressed.

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 0% and the description adds no meaning to the parameter names. 'zoid' is completely unexplained, and 'domain_name' is only implicitly connected to the primary domain concept without any format or constraint detail.

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 names a specific verb (set) and resource (domain as primary domain), making the core action clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling domain tools like get_domain_details or verify_domain, though it does not explicitly differentiate from set_default_dkim.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as domain verification or ownership, nor does it indicate which scenarios call for setting a primary domain.

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