Change hostname

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

Substantial disclosure beyond annotations: reserved-name rules, the 422 reservedHostname error, hostname format constraints, required scope (services:manage) and full-access API key, and that the route is not idempotency-keyed. The async nature and tracking UUID are clearly explained, matching the destructiveHint and openWorldHint annotations without contradiction.

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?

Information is dense but front-loaded with the core action, then validation rules and the async return. It is a bit long, but nearly every sentence carries a distinct constraint, so waste is minimal.

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 a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, side effects, error cases, required permissions, async tracking, and hostname validation—everything needed to invoke it 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters with patterns and lengths. The description restates the hostname rule but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation at full coverage.

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 and resource ('Queue a customer-managed hostname change') for named service types (Container VPS, VPS, Cloud VPS). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_hostname and reset_hostname.

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?

Implies usage by describing the operation, and mentions the returned noty UUID ties to get_event/wait_for_event, which hints at a follow-up pattern. However, it never explicitly states when to use this vs alternatives like reset_hostname, nor does it name any alternative tool.

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