delete_verified_domain

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds 'Irreversible' and explains consequence (domain unusable until re-verified). This enriches the annotation information without contradicting it.

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?

Very concise: a one-sentence purpose, a warning, then parameter section. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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?

The description covers the action, consequences, and domain_name source. However, it omits the account parameter and does not mention possible errors or response details (though output schema exists). Adequate but with clear gaps.

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?

Only domain_name is described with an example and a source (list_verified_domains). The account parameter is not mentioned at all. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description should cover all parameters; missing one is a significant gap.

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 verb (delete) and resource (verified sending domain), with permanent deletion emphasized. Distinct from siblings like create_verified_domain and verify_verified_domain.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: warns of irreversibility, mentions need for re-verification, and references list_verified_domains to obtain domain names. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but clear enough.

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