Quote domain transfer

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), it discloses non-obvious traits: the auth code is hashed into the payload and never returned, the call yields a quoteToken, it performs no domain mutation, and it requires domains:read plus paid domains:transfer scope/caps. This is exactly the security/scope context an agent needs.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the critical side-effect and return-value facts. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 quote tool with no output schema, the description supplies the key facts: what it returns (quoteToken), what it does not do, the hashing behavior, and the auth/scopes. An agent can invoke it correctly without further inference.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning about authCode (hashed into the payload, not echoed back) and clarifies the quote/output contract via quoteToken. It does not touch the contact ID or nameserver parameters, which remain schema-only.

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 states a specific verb+resource ('Create a VPSNet-priced domain transfer quote') and explicitly scopes it as quote-only ('does not submit the domain action'), which cleanly separates it from confirm_domain_transfer and quote_domain_register. No ambiguity about what is produced.

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?

It clearly frames this as the pre-submission step ('does not submit the domain action'), implying confirmation is a separate call, and states the required scopes. It stops short of naming the sibling to use next (confirm_domain_transfer), so it is strong context without an explicit alternative pointer.

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