delete_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: the deletion does not destroy connected blogs/landing pages, only unlinks them. This is valuable safety information. However, it does not mention any prerequisites, failure conditions, or return behavior, which would enrich transparency further.

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 concise, using two short sentences to convey both the action and the critical side effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple delete-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted and what is preserved. It lacks information about potential restrictions or failure modes, but given the tool's simplicity, this is a minor gap.

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% for the single parameter domainId, already specifying that it is the ID from list_domains. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Remove' and the resource 'custom domain', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_publication or delete_landing_page. It also clarifies the scope by stating that connected blogs and landing pages are unlinked but not deleted, which further differentiates it from content deletion tools.

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?

The description clearly implies when to use this tool (to remove a custom domain) and provides important context about the consequence: connected content is unlinked but not deleted. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the non-destructive effect guides proper usage.

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