domains_activate

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

The description reveals that the tool switches addresses from managed fallback to custom domain, which is useful behavioral context. Without annotations, more information about idempotency, permissions, or side effects would improve transparency.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, no redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the action, precondition, and effect. It could mention idempotency or error cases for 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, so the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond mentioning the activation condition. 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 clearly states the verb 'Activate' and the resource 'custom mailbox addresses', with a precondition 'once ProjectDomain receive checks have passed'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like domains_check or domains_apply.

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?

Explicitly states the precondition for use ('once checks have passed'), providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use or directly compare to alternative tools.

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