add_custom_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds a useful behavioral detail about GoDaddy apex domains being rejected before API creation and suggests a workaround. However, it does not discuss other side effects, failure modes, or whether this is a mutating operation.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The GoDaddy caveat is useful but slightly extends length; overall it is efficient without fluff.

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?

The description provides key workflow context and a notable edge case, but given the tool's complexity (6 params, no annotations), it omits guidance on several parameters and does not mention the output schema or post-add behavior. It is adequate but leaves 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only adds meaning for two of six parameters ('provider_name' and 'dns_zone'), leaving 'project_id', 'domain', 'mode', and 'app_id' unexplained. This is insufficient for a 6-parameter tool.

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 action ('Add a custom domain') and a temporal context ('after provider detection'), making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'attach_custom_domain', which may overlap in function.

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?

It clearly indicates when to use this tool ('after provider detection') and specifies required inputs ('confirmed provider_name and authoritative dns_zone'). It lacks explicit alternatives/exclusions, but the context is helpful.

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