Link domain to website

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only mutation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds the behavioral effect that the domain can serve traffic for the website. However, it does not disclose whether linking overwrites an existing association, whether ownership/DNS verification is required, or what happens after the operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every part contributes to understanding the operation's purpose and effect.

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 two-parameter, no-output-schema mutation with clear annotations, the description is nearly complete: it states the resource, the action, and the intended outcome. It omits usage alternatives and potential side effects, but the low complexity makes this a minor gap.

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%, so the input schema already documents both parameters (domain and website_uid). The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond restating that a domain is linked to a website.

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 uses a specific verb ('Links') and resource ('specified Agency Plan website') and explains the intended effect ('so it can serve traffic for that domain'). It is clearly distinct from sibling operations like unlinkDomainFromWebsiteV1 or changeWebsiteDomainV1.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as unlinkDomainFromWebsiteV1, changeWebsiteDomainV1, or DNS/domain-verification tools. The only implied context is that linking is for serving traffic, but there are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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