vibekit_add_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds one useful behavioral detail (DNS must be updated manually), but it does not disclose whether the operation is safe/reversible, what errors may occur, or any other side effects. This is minimal disclosure, so 2.

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 sentences, front-loads the primary purpose, and includes a necessary follow-up instruction. No redundant content, every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple with two well-documented parameters and no output schema. The description covers the main action and the DNS post-step, but lacks details about prerequisites (app must exist), conflict handling, or return values. Adequate but with clear gaps for a mutation tool with no annotations.

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% for both appId and domain, including an example for domain. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters, so the baseline of 3 is 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 clearly states the verb 'Add' and the resource 'custom domain to an app', distinguishing it from sibling tools like vibekit_remove_domain. It also provides a specific follow-up action (DNS CNAME), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies when to use by the clear action and adds a post-requirement (DNS update), but it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use. Sibling names like vibekit_remove_domain provide implicit contrast. This is clear context without explicit exclusions, so a 4 is appropriate.

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