Delete domain

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful context by stating the action is destructive and requires explicit confirmation. This reinforces the safety warning and clarifies that no interactive confirmation exists, which is valuable behavioral information beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The invocation condition and safety warning are front-loaded, making the description easy to scan and act on.

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 straightforward deletion tool, the description covers the key context: what is deleted, that it is destructive, and that confirmation is required. It does not describe return values, but no output schema exists and the operation's outcome is reasonably inferable. Minor missing details like hostname format or validation are not critical.

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 only 25%, with only 'confirm' described. The description does not explain the meaning or format of project, service, or hostname, relying on their names alone. Since the description does not compensate for the low schema coverage, parameter semantics are under-specified.

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 ('remove') and resource ('custom domain from a Lizard service'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like domain_attach and domain_verify by focusing on deletion.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants to remove a custom domain,' giving clear invocation context. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the domain-related sibling tools make the intended use fairly obvious.

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