kas_subdomain

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

The description discloses the 'in_progress' failure mode for updates after creation and explains the optional pick/filter parameters. However, with no annotations, it does not address the safety/destructive nature of delete, permissions, or return value behavior beyond filtering.

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 front-loaded, using a bulleted action list with inline parameter examples. Every sentence adds operational value with no filler.

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?

The tool is complex (5 actions, nested params) and has no output schema or annotations. The description gives an operational overview but omits return values, required fields for update, and when-to-use guidance. It is sufficient for basic invocation but leaves gaps.

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 50% (pick and filter have descriptions), but the description adds concrete examples for create (subdomain_name, domain_name) and move (target_kas_login), and explains pick/filter behavior. The 'params' catch-all remains under-specified, and the update fields token is vague.

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 subdomains' and enumerates five concrete actions (list, create, update, delete, move), making the tool's purpose specific. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kas_domain and kas_dns by focusing on the subdomain resource.

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 alternatives. It does not mention kas_domain or other siblings as alternatives for domain-level operations. The description implies subdomain management but lacks decision rules or exclusions.

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