Delete Website

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

The annotation includes destructiveHint: true, which already indicates the destructive nature. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether deletion is permanent, what associated resources (databases, files) are affected, or if there are any safeguards or confirmations required.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action. However, it is extremely sparse and relies heavily on the tool name and schema for context.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the scope of deletion (e.g., whether it removes databases, emails, or SSL certificates), nor does it warn about irreversibility or offer guidance on recovery. More context is essential for such a high-impact action.

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 input schema has full coverage (100%) for the sole parameter 'domain' with the description 'Website domain'. The description itself does not add any semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete a website' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (website), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hosting_websites_create or hosting_websites_list. It is specific and unambiguous, though it lacks any scope details such as whether this affects only the website files or also associated databases.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. The tool name implies the purpose, but there is no explicit context about appropriate scenarios or prerequisites, such as confirming the website is no longer needed.

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