remove_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing irreversibility, potential side effects (e.g., SSL certificates, site availability), or error scenarios. For a destructive mutation tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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 plus an example, immediately conveying the action in a front-loaded, no-waste format. Every element (the verb, the resource, the example) serves a clear purpose.

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 the simplicity of the tool (2 required parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. It explains the core action and gives a use case. However, important context like whether removal is permanent, whether the domain must be verified first, and what happens to the site afterwards is missing. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 already fully describes both parameters (site_id and hostname) with 100% coverage. The description adds only a helpful example that implicitly maps to these fields, but does not enrich the meaning beyond what the schema provides. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 tool removes a custom domain from a website, with a concrete example that distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_domain and verify_domain. The verb 'remove' and resource 'custom domain' are specific and 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 meaning of usage is implied by the example phrase, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as verify_domain or delete_website. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, making it adequate but not proactive.

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