hostinger-api-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states this is a deletion operation (implying destructive behavior) but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent/reversible, what permissions are required, if there are rate limits, or what happens to associated domains. The phrase 'remove unused contact profiles' hints at a safety constraint but isn't explicit enough.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides usage context. Every word earns its place with zero redundancy or fluff, and it's front-loaded with the essential action.

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 destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after deletion (success response, error conditions), whether there are dependencies (e.g., cannot delete if profile is in use), or authentication requirements. The context signals show a simple parameter structure, but the tool's destructive nature demands more completeness.

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 schema has 100% description coverage (whoisId is documented as 'WHOIS ID'), so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides—it doesn't explain how to obtain the whoisId or what format it expects.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('WHOIS contact profile'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'domains_deleteDomainForwardingV1' or 'domains_deleteWHOISProfileV1' (which doesn't exist in the list), though the specificity of 'WHOIS contact profile' provides some implicit distinction.

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 second sentence provides some usage context ('remove unused contact profiles from account'), which implies this should be used for cleanup rather than active profiles. However, it doesn't specify when NOT to use it, mention prerequisites (e.g., profile must exist), or explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'domains_getWHOISProfileV1' for checking usage first.

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