npm_create_redirection_host

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says only that a host is created and that advanced_config injects custom nginx config; it does not disclose required permissions, side effects (e.g., whether a certificate is auto-provisioned), duplicate-domain behavior, or what the call returns on success/failure.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with no filler. The second sentence is nearly redundant with the schema's advanced_config description, which is the only minor waste.

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?

A 12-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema needs more from its description than two sentences. It omits validation constraints (forward_http_code 300-308), the four required fields, auth/permission needs, and any notion of the returned resource.

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 all 12 parameters are already documented, including advanced_config itself as 'Custom nginx configuration'. The description's mention of advanced_config adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new redirection host.' That is unambiguous and the resource type ('redirection host') separates it from the create_proxy_host / create_dead_host / create_stream siblings by name. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with those siblings in the description text.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus update_redirection_host, create_proxy_host, or create_dead_host, and no prerequisites or preconditions (e.g., certificate must exist, domain must not already be taken). The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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