dns_delete_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it deletes all records, which is a key behavioral detail. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is irreversible or mention any permissions or side effects beyond record deletion. It also references a 'ctx' parameter not present in the schema, which adds confusion. Overall, it provides some transparency but lacks depth.

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, with a clear opening sentence. However, it includes an unnecessary 'Args' section with 'ctx' that is not part of the input schema, adding noise. The structure is acceptable but could be tightened by removing the extraneous parameter and focusing on the 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?

For a destructive operation with no annotations and minimal schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention reversibility, idempotency, prerequisites (e.g., domain ownership), or error behavior if the domain does not exist. The return value is only described as a 'Status message,' which is vague. Given the tool's complexity (single parameter, but destructive), more context is needed.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides a basic explanation for 'domain' ('The domain name to delete'), which is only slightly more than the parameter name. Critically, it mentions a 'ctx' parameter that is not in the schema, misleading the agent. It does not specify domain format or any constraints, so it adds minimal value and even introduces inconsistency.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Delete a DNS domain and all its records.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like dns_delete_record, which deletes a single record, and dns_update_record, which modifies. It also clarifies scope by explicitly including all records.

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 tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that for deleting a single record, dns_delete_record should be used, nor does it state any conditions or exclusions. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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