Delete domain glue record

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that: the operation is queued/asynchronous, it requires domains:manage with an API key, and deletion is blocked by existing delegation. It does not say how to observe the queued result.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the destructive action front-loaded and the prerequisite and auth requirement following in order of relevance.

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 destructive, queued delete with no output schema and fully described params, the description covers the safety-relevant essentials: what is destroyed, the blocking precondition, and auth scope. It omits what the agent gets back (e.g. a queued action to track via wait_for_event) and failure behavior on a missing record.

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%, so domain_id, record_id and idempotencyKey are already fully documented in the schema (including the source list tools). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Queue deleting a same-domain nameserver IP record for an owned domain') and defines the domain concept (glue record) in a way that separates it from siblings like delete_dns_record and delete_domain_parent_ds. An agent can identify the target object without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition: remove or change domain nameserver delegation first if the hostname is still delegated. That is genuine when/when-not style guidance. It stops short of naming sibling alternatives (list_domain_glue_records, create_domain_glue_record) or stating when a glue record should be deleted at all.

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