create_verified_domain

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint as false. Description adds: sends verification code, authenticated via API key, max 10 concurrent requests, respects read-only and dry-run modes. No contradiction. Adds useful context beyond 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?

Description is concise and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, then domain derivation and next step, then behavioral notes, then clearly formatted Args and Returns. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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 output schema exists, description covers return fields (domain, verified, etc.). Covers the whole process: send code, then complete verification with verify_verified_domain. Context about auth, concurrency, and modes is sufficient for a creation tool.

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 0%, so description fully explains parameters. verification_email: explains it's a mailbox at the domain and that code is sent there. account: explains it's optional, with example and reference to list_accounts. Also explains domain derivation from email after '@'. Adds significant meaning.

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?

Description clearly states the tool initiates domain verification by sending a verification code. It distinguishes from siblings: verify_verified_domain (completes verification) and list_verified_domains (check existing). Verb 'create_verified_domain' is specific and aligns with purpose.

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?

States when to use: to start domain verification. Suggests checking existing domains with list_verified_domains first. Describes next step (pass code to verify_verified_domain). Mentions concurrency limit and modes. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but context implies domain should not be already verified.

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