Unlink Domain

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

While the destructiveHint annotation is present, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotation already provides. It does not mention potential side effects (e.g., website accessibility, DNS effects, irreversibility), which would be useful for a destructive operation. The description neither contradicts the annotation nor enriches it.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that perfectly captures the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. Every word earns its place, and the structure is ideal for a simple operation.

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 simple tool with two fully documented parameters and a destructiveHint annotation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any mention of return values, side effects, or prerequisites, and there is no output schema to fill that gap. The description could be slightly more informative, especially given the destructive nature, but it is not severely incomplete.

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% with both parameters ('Domain to unlink' and 'Website UID') already described in the input schema. The description itself adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Unlink a domain from an Agency Plan website' clearly states the action (unlink) and the resource (a domain from an Agency Plan website). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like agency_website_link_domain and agency_website_change_domain by specifying the exact operation.

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 implies the use case (removing a domain from a website) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like link_domain or change_domain. There are no explicit exclusions or alternative references, so the usage guidance is only implied by the tool's purpose.

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