delete-host

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by enumerating precisely what is destroyed (verification, indexing/query history, sitemaps, important-URL settings), stating that re-adding starts from scratch, and disclosing the confirm-gate refusal behavior. This is exactly the consequence detail a mutation tool needs.

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?

Front-loads the action, then the irreversibility, then the confirm gate, then routing guidance. Dense but every sentence carries distinct, non-redundant information.

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, non-idempotent tool with no output schema, the description covers consequences, guardrails, and alternatives completely. An agent has everything needed to invoke it safely.

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 both params are already documented (baseline 3). The description adds value by emphasizing that confirm must be true for the tool to act at all, clarifying that a behavioral requirement exists beyond the schema's required[] list (which only lists host_id).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a host (site) from Yandex Webmaster') and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings add-host (adding) and URL-drop operations. An agent can identify exactly what this tool does and what it does not.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('user has explicitly asked to remove a site and accepts its history is lost') and two when-not cases with the correct alternative named ('call add-host', and don't use it to drop a single URL). Nothing is left to inference.

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