Attach Domain

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by revealing that the tool returns DNS records, that records must be published before the domain functions, that wildcards require three records, and that mustBeGrey records must not be proxied or certificate issuance fails. This is exactly the kind of behavioral disclosure beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/idempotentHint that an agent needs.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, required follow-up action, and a critical conditional about mustBeGrey. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids filler. The length is justified by the complexity of DNS and Cloudflare behavior.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description correctly explains what the tool returns — the domain and DNS records — and instructs the agent on how to use that output. It also covers the Cloudflare proxying pitfall and the difference between wildcard and subdomain record requirements. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool and handle the result 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics: it clarifies that the port is the in-Cube routing target and gives wildcard-domain behavior relevant to the domain parameter. It doesn't restate each parameter, but it enriches the most consequential ones beyond the schema descriptions.

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: 'Attach a custom domain to a Cube, routing it to an in-Cube port.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling domain tools like list_domains, get_domain_records, update_domain, and delete_domain. The purpose is unambiguous and operationally specific.

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 strong contextual guidance: it tells the agent that DNS records must be relayed verbatim and that the domain does nothing until they are published. It also explains wildcard vs. subdomain record counts and Cloudflare grey-cloud requirements. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the use case is clear enough from the purpose and context.

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