npm_create_dead_host

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the operation ('create a 404 host') without mentioning side effects, idempotency, prerequisites (e.g., certificate requirements), or what happens to existing configurations. This leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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 conveys the core purpose without any redundant words. It is concise and efficient.

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 tool has five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description is too minimal to provide the necessary context about parameter usage, behavioral implications, or configuration options, making it inadequate for confident invocation.

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 0%, and the description only references 'one or more domains' (domain_names). It does not explain the purpose or meaning of meta, enabled, certificate_id, or advanced_config, which remain undocumented for the agent.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('404 (dead) host'), and differentiates it from sibling host creation tools (e.g., proxy, stream, redirection) by focusing on dead hosts.

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 clear use case: creating a host that returns 404 for given domains. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select this tool when a dead host is needed.

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