verify_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'trigger verification' but does not disclose whether the operation is synchronous or asynchronous, what happens if DNS records are incorrect, rate limits, or side effects like email notifications. These gaps significantly reduce transparency.

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 a single, succinct sentence that efficiently communicates the purpose and prerequisite. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is lacking. It omits crucial details like return values, error scenarios, whether the tool polls for completion, and how to interpret results. The agent may be left without enough information to handle the response correctly.

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 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema; it only provides context about DNS records. Baseline is 3 due to full schema coverage, and no additional value is provided.

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 action ('trigger verification') and resource ('domain'), and specifies a prerequisite ('after you've set the required DNS/TXT records'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `add_domain` (which adds) or `get_domain` (which retrieves).

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 provides a clear condition for when to use the tool ('after you've set the required DNS/TXT records'), giving context for correct invocation. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, but the sibling list provides some context.

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