Update Hosting Auto Renew

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint/idempotentHint annotations: explains that off keeps the plan active until expireDate, that a trial ends without charge, that hosting is removed afterward except Link in Bio which downgrades to free with content kept, and that the response `message` describes the outcome. This is exactly the kind of consequence disclosure a mutation tool needs.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the on/off switch is stated first, then consequences, then the response/error notes. It is a long single paragraph with some nested clauses that could be split, but nearly every sentence carries decision-relevant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description fills the gap by naming the `message` field as the outcome carrier, and it covers the NOT_SUPPORTED_FOR_PRODUCT error case. An agent has enough to call this correctly and relay results to the user.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds real meaning by spelling out the downstream effect of each auto_renew state rather than just restating the boolean. It doesn't mention dry_run, but the schema documents that adequately.

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 ('Turn auto-renew on or off for a domain's paid hosting') and enumerates the affected products, which distinguishes it from update_auto_renew (domain registration) and from mutation siblings like create_hosting or delete_hosting.

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?

Points to get_hosting for reading the current setting and notes free plans are unsupported, giving clear context for when to call it. It never explicitly says to use update_auto_renew instead for domain registration renewals, which is the closest-named sibling, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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