yd_webmaster_verification_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but fails to disclose crucial behaviors: whether the process is asynchronous, what the return value indicates, or side effects like DNS changes. It simply states 'start host verification' without detailing outcomes, failure modes, or permissions needed.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words, achieving conciseness. However, it is slightly under-specified for a tool initiating an action, missing opportunities to add essential context without being verbose.

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?

Given no output schema and missing annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns or confirms. It fails to mention that verification may be asynchronous, that it requires a host to already exist, or any potential errors. This incompleteness hinders correct usage.

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 value by linking host_id to yd_webmaster_hosts_get, aiding understanding of its source. However, verification_type only restates 'Verification method' as in schema, adding no new semantic depth.

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 clearly states the verb 'start', resource 'host verification', and specifies 'with a specified method', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from siblings like yd_webmaster_verification_get by indicating it initiates rather than retrieves verification.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as checking existing verification status first or ensuring the host has been added. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving the agent without context for correct invocation.

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