deployado_remove_domain

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on irreversibility, DNS/certificate cleanup side effects, or whether removing a primary domain is blocked — so it earns little credit over structured data.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It is terse but does not pad or bury the purpose, though it borders on under-specification for a destructive operation.

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 and full annotation coverage, the core is adequate for a simple two-parameter mutation. However, for a destructive domain operation an agent would benefit from knowing the effect on DNS records, primary-domain status, or attached certificates, which is absent.

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% and both parameters (app_id, domain_id as UUIDs) are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further meaning about the identifiers or their relationships.

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 ('Remove a custom domain from an app'), which is unambiguous about what the tool does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like set_primary_domain or verify_domains, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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 guidance on when to use this versus add_domain, set_primary_domain, or verify_domains, and no stated preconditions (e.g., whether the domain must first be detached or whether it is the primary domain). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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