set_parking

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states that parked domains show a placeholder page, but does not mention side effects (e.g., impact on DNS, email, or website), reversibility, or permission requirements. This is insufficient for a mutation action.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the explanation is efficient. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits context such as propagation time, effect on existing settings, or error conditions. For a straightforward tool, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds little beyond the schema. The tool description briefly mentions the effect but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema provides. A score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action (enable domain parking) and the resource (a domain), with a brief explanation of what parking does (shows a placeholder page). This distinguishes it from many sibling tools like register_domain or delete_domain, though it could be more explicit in differentiating from set_for_sale.

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, such as when parking is appropriate, prerequisites (e.g., domain registration), or situations where parking should not be used. Agents lack context for decision-making.

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