domain_delete_subdomain

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a destructive write operation. The description adds nothing beyond that — no warnings about data loss, no mention of irreversible consequences, no side effects. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 2 reflects minimal added value.

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 extremely short (one verb phrase plus an Args section). It is not verbose, but the Args section merely repeats the parameter name in Russian, which borders on tautology. The structure is minimal but not wasteful.

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 destructive operation with one required parameter at 0% schema coverage, and an output schema present, the description should at least explain how to obtain subdomain_id, whether deletion cascades to related resources (e.g., DNS records, sites), and any prerequisites. It provides none of this, leaving significant gaps for an agent to call the tool 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'subdomain_id: ID поддомена', which restates the parameter name without adding format, source, or how to obtain the ID. This is inadequate for a required parameter with zero schema documentation.

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 clear verb and resource in Russian: 'Убрать поддомен' (remove a subdomain). This is specific and distinguishable from siblings like domain_delete (removes a whole domain) and domain_add_subdomain. However, it doesn't explicitly name the alternative or scope in English, and the tool name itself already conveys this.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as domain_delete or domain_remove_directives. The description does not state prerequisites, such as whether the subdomain must be empty or have no active sites.

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