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

With no annotations provided, the description is the only source of behavioral context. It does not disclose pagination behavior, date-range semantics, required filters (promptId, startAt, endAt), or any side effects or permissions. 'Get' implies a read operation, but no further transparency is offered.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It omits essential context that should accompany a tool with seven parameters and no schema descriptions, making the brevity a deficiency.

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's parameters, required arguments, and sibling context, the description is far from complete. It fails to explain the relationship to get_citation_domains, the meaning of the required date range, pagination, or any filtering parameters, leaving a 7-parameter tool almost entirely undocumented.

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 0% and the description mentions none of the seven parameters. The required fields (promptId, startAt, endAt) and optional filters (page, pageSize, regions, platforms) are completely unexplained, leaving the agent without semantic guidance.

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's action ('Get') and resource ('citation domain list for a prompt'). This differentiates it from siblings like get_citation_domains (global domains without prompt) and get_prompt_citation_urls (URLs vs domains).

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs the similarly named get_citation_domains or get_prompt_citation_urls. The description only states the core purpose without contextual or exclusionary information.

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