deployado_add_domain

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-destructive, idempotent mutation with closed-world behavior. The description adds useful operational context beyond the annotations by warning that DNS configuration is a separate required step, which is non-obvious and important for correct use.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the critical prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or filler text.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation tool with a fully documented schema and informative annotations, the description supplies the key external prerequisite. It does not describe the return value or subsequent verification flow, but the core behavior needed to invoke the tool correctly is present.

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 both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 and resource: adding a custom domain to an app. It is clear without opening the schema, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like remove_domain, set_primary_domain, or verify_domains.

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 gives an important prerequisite: DNS must be configured separately via CNAME or A record. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus related domain-management siblings, nor does it describe any exclusions or follow-up steps such as verification.

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