Unlink domain from website

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing concrete behavioral effects: traffic stops immediately, files and database are preserved, other linked domains remain accessible, and the only-domain edge case is called out. This is exactly the kind of context an agent needs before invoking a destructive action.

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 compact, well-structured, and front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence earns its place by adding a distinct behavioral or edge-case detail, with no redundant wording.

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 mutation with annotations already marking it destructive and non-read-only, the description provides all essential operational context: immediate traffic impact, preservation of files/database, and the only-domain edge case. No return schema exists, so explaining return values is not required.

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 input schema already covers both parameters with 100% description coverage, so the baseline applies. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, but none is needed here.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Unlinks a domain from the specified Agency Plan website.' It clearly distinguishes this from the obvious sibling, agency-hosting_linkDomainToWebsiteV1, by describing the inverse operation and clarifies the scope (Agency Plan websites only).

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 the primary use case (removing a domain from a website) and provides important context, such as files/database being preserved and other domains staying accessible. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like linkDomainToWebsiteV1 or changeWebsiteDomainV1, so guidance remains implicit rather than explicit.

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