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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool shows the subdomain and reports whether it is suspended, and explains the real-world consequence of suspension. No side effects are expected for a read operation, and the description is transparent about this.

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 extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose, format, suspension behavior, and authentication. Every sentence is essential and front-loaded. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (subdomain and suspension status) and why suspension matters. It also mentions the API key requirement. It could be slightly improved by noting that the subdomain might not be set, but it's sufficient for a simple read tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by explaining what the output contains (the subdomain format and suspension status), which is useful context for interpreting the tool's value.

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 purpose: 'Show the branded subdomain on this account' with the format ({name}.oqr.to). It also specifies it reports suspension status, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_subdomain and clear_subdomain that perform mutations.

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 provides context for when to use the tool (to check the subdomain and its suspension status) and explains the suspension behavior. It implicitly distinguishes from write tools (set_subdomain, clear_subdomain) but doesn't explicitly state 'use this instead of X when Y.' The API key requirement is noted.

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