npm_create_dead_host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but only hints that a dead host answers 404. It says nothing about permissions/auth required, side effects, whether DNS/SSL needs configuring, or the response shape — significant gaps for a create/mutation tool.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the core purpose leads. The second sentence is mildly redundant with the advanced_config schema entry, keeping it just short of a 5.

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?

Parameters are fully covered by the schema and no output schema is needed, but for a create tool with zero annotations the description should say more about side effects, required permissions, and relationships to certificates/proxy hosts. It is adequate but leaves real gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters; baseline 3 applies. The one sentence on advanced_config merely restates the schema field rather than adding format or syntax guidance.

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+resource ("Create a new 404 dead host") and the verb form cleanly separates it from the list/get/update/delete/enable/disable dead-host siblings. It's clear what the tool does without opening the schema, though it doesn't explicitly name how it differs from e.g. npm_create_proxy_host.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. whether a certificate or proxy host must exist first), and no mention of the alternative host types (proxy/redirection/stream) an agent might choose instead. The agent must infer all of this.

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