hosting_createWebsiteV1

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

Without annotations, the description bears full burden. It reveals that 'Website creation takes up to a few minutes to complete' and advises to 'Check the websites list endpoint to see when your new website becomes available,' indicating asynchronous behavior. It also discloses the datacenter_code requirement logic. No contradictions or hidden side effects are omitted.

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 concise with four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, listing required parameters, explaining datacenter_code behavior, and noting the asynchronous nature. No redundant or irrelevant information is present.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers key aspects: purpose, parameter requirements, asynchronous completion, and verification method. It could mention the return value or error handling, but overall, it provides sufficient context for a creation tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, but the description adds value beyond schema descriptions. It clarifies that domain cannot start with 'www.' and explains when datacenter_code is required, which is not in the schema. This enriches understanding beyond the parameter descriptions alone.

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 'Create a new website for the authenticated client,' specifying the action (create), resource (website), and context (authenticated client). It adds details about domain and order ID, and distinguishes from sibling tools like hosting_deployStaticWebsite by focusing on creating a website under a hosting plan.

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 explains when to include datacenter_code ('required when creating the first website on a new hosting plan') and notes that subsequent websites use the same datacenter automatically. It provides context for usage but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives, though the purpose is clear enough.

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