Confirm domain transfer

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

Annotations already flag the operation as destructive and idempotent, but the description adds critical behavioral context: payments are non-refundable once confirmed and the transfer is queued only after payment succeeds. It also specifies the payment source (VPSNet account), which goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 tight sentences, front-loading the main action and payment consequence. Every sentence contributes necessary information without repetition.

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 payment-confirmation mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, irreversibility, and sequencing. It does not describe the return value or how to check transfer status afterward, which is a minor gap given the lack of an output schema.

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 parameter meaning is already well documented. The description adds a useful cross-parameter constraint: idempotencyKey, quoteToken, and authCode must match the values used for the quote.

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: confirm a quoted domain transfer and pay. It clearly distinguishes this action from the preceding quote step by requiring the same idempotencyKey, quoteToken, and authCode.

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?

Makes the sequencing clear: this is the confirmation step after quote_domain_transfer, and it must reuse the quote's tokens. It does not explicitly name the alternative tool or state when not to use it, but the context is clear.

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