create_custom_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the high-level action without mentioning side effects, permissions, idempotency, domain verification requirements, or failure modes. For a mutating operation, this is insufficient.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and readable, though it could have included more context without becoming bloated.

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 tool has 3 required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what attaching a domain entails, how it affects the service, whether it is reversible, or how it differs from the similar sibling tool. The agent is left without enough context to use it correctly.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema gives, but it does not need to compensate for missing parameter info.

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 action ('attach') and resource ('custom domain to a service'), making the core purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'create_service_domain', which likely serves a similar or identical function, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_service_domain' or 'delete_service_domain'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess.

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