Delete website

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description significantly adds behavioral context: removal is irreversible, all files/databases/configuration are deleted, the hosting plan remains, processing is asynchronous, and the response returns before completion. It also documents the 404 case. This goes well beyond the 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?

Despite being multi-paragraph, every sentence adds necessary information for a destructive operation. The irreversible warning leads, followed by scope, error behavior, and async semantics. The structure is logical and front-loaded with the most critical guidance.

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 description is fully self-contained for a one-parameter destructive tool. It covers what gets destroyed, what is preserved, which website types are valid, error cases, and asynchronous behavior. Even without an output schema, an agent has everything needed to call it safely and correctly.

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 only says 'Domain name', but the description adds critical meaning: it must be the exact website domain, not a preview domain or alias. It also ties the domain to the supported website types, giving the agent real guidance for supplying the single parameter correctly.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it permanently removes a website and all its data. It clearly distinguishes this from other hosting operations by detailing what is deleted and what is preserved. The scope is unambiguous even among many sibling 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 description gives explicit usage constraints: requires user confirmation, supports only main/addon domain websites and Website Builder websites, and excludes parked domains, subdomains, preview domains, and aliases. It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling for unsupported cases, but the supported/not-supported guidance is clear enough for correct tool selection.

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