arvan_delete_domain

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by explaining the automatic lookup of domain_id if not supplied, which is useful beyond annotations. However, it lacks details on error handling or effects of idempotency.

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 two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the main purpose, and the second adds key behavioral detail. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 the simple two-parameter schema and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description covers purpose and key behavior. However, it lacks details on return values, error scenarios, or prerequisites, making it adequate but not thorough.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It clarifies that domain_id is optional and auto-looked up, and implies domain is the domain name, but does not fully define each parameter's meaning or format.

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 clearly states the tool removes a domain from the CDN. The verb 'remove' and resource 'domain' are specific, and 'from the CDN' adds scope, distinguishing it from other delete tools like arvan_delete_dns_record.

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 implies usage through the name and purpose, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like arvan_delete_server or arvan_delete_dns_record. No exclusions or context for selection are provided.

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