alternative_distribution_domains_create_instance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing: no auth/permission requirements, no idempotency or side-effect notes, no response behavior. It only restates the HTTP route and points to an external schema name.

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?

Short, but the route is duplicated verbatim ('POST /v1/alternativeDistributionDomains (POST /v1/alternativeDistributionDomains)'), which is pure waste, and the schema reference duplicates the schema's own description. Front-loading is fine but the content is not earning its place.

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 create tool with a single nested-object body, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain the request envelope's key fields or at least what a successful creation yields. Pointing at an OpenAPI component name the agent may not be able to resolve leaves the definition substantially incomplete.

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?

There is a single 'body' parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it as a JSON body referencing components.schemas.AlternativeDistributionDomainCreateRequest. The description merely repeats that pointer, adding no field-level meaning, which matches the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 conveys a create operation on the alternativeDistributionDomains resource only through the REST route 'POST /v1/alternativeDistributionDomains'. There is no plain-language statement of what an alternative distribution domain is or what creating one accomplishes, though the resource and verb are technically identifiable.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as alternative_distribution_domains_get_instance, get_collection, or delete_instance. No prerequisites, no context, and no exclusions are stated.

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