Change website domain

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

Annotations already indicate this is a destructive, non-read-only mutation. The description adds the useful special behavior that setting domain to null reverts to the temporary domain, but it does not disclose broader consequences such as DNS/domain release effects. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose, request layout, and null-revert behavior. The purpose is front-loaded and there is no redundant 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?

For a 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the core operation, required parameter placement, and an important edge case. It could mention side effects or success response behavior, but the annotations and schema cover most of the remaining context.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the request layout: the current domain goes in the path and the new domain goes in the request body. It also reinforces the null-to-revert special case.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Changes the primary domain for an Agency Plan website.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and its scope, and distinguishes it from sibling domain-linking/unlinking tools.

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 operation context is clear: use this when changing the primary domain of an Agency Plan website. The description also explains how the current and new domains are supplied. It does not explicitly name alternatives like linkDomainToWebsiteV1, but the use case is specific enough to guide selection.

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