kas_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists action names and parameters but does not explain side effects (e.g., delete is destructive, move changes ownership), permissions, reversibility, or return values. The pick/filter option is helpful but not behavioral.

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 compact and well-structured with a bulleted action list, making it easy to scan. Every sentence/line adds relevant information, and the optional params are explained in one concise sentence without unnecessary words.

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 tool has 6 actions and no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, errors, or prerequisites. The update action is vague, and there is no mention of what each action returns or potential side effects, leaving significant gaps for effective use.

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 description supplements the generic 'params' object in the schema by listing domain-specific parameters for create and move (e.g., domain_tld, domain_path, ssl_proxy, target_kas_login). However, update uses vague ellipsis ('...fields') and no types or constraints are given, leaving some parameters undefined.

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 'Manage domains' and enumerates specific actions (list, list_tlds, create, update, delete, move), identifying the resource and operations. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kas_ssl, kas_dns, and kas_database that manage other resources.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools or how to choose among actions. The description only says 'Manage domains' without discussing prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions, leaving usage entirely implicit.

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