Delete Domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses irreversibility and the concrete blast radius ('will stop all email sending/receiving for that domain'). It omits authorization requirements, whether associated records/pending emails are removed, and confirmation of what a successful response indicates.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place: the action first, then the mandatory safety protocol. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what the agent most needs: the irreversible consequence and the user-confirmation requirement. It is only short of a 5 because the cascade scope (sub-resources, in-flight messages) and error conditions on an invalid ID are left unstated.

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?

The single parameter ('id') is fully documented in the schema at 100% coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning about the identifier — e.g. that it is the domain ID from list-domains, not the domain name — which would have been genuinely useful since users often supply hostnames.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a domain') plus the owning account ('Emailit'), which cleanly separates it from the other delete-* siblings (delete-api-key, delete-contact, delete-template) and from update-domain/verify-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?

Gives an explicit precondition and procedure — confirm with the user before invoking — which is exactly the guidance needed for a destructive action. It does not name alternatives (e.g. update-domain to disable, verify-domain to fix configuration) or state when deletion is inappropriate, so it falls short of a 5.

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