Retrieve a complete list of all subdomains configured on your cPanel hosting account.
List all subdomains
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_subdomains"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'List all subdomains' but does not clarify the scope (e.g., across all domains), whether the operation is read-only, or any output details. The word 'List' implies a read operation, but additional behavioral traits are not disclosed.
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, direct sentence that wastes no words. It is appropriately concise for a tool with no parameters and a simple action.
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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description communicates the primary purpose. However, it leaves the exact scope of 'all subdomains' ambiguous and does not mention any return structure. It is complete for a simple operation but could benefit from one clarifying detail.
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 description does not need to explain parameter meanings. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not miss anything.
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 the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'subdomains', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_domains and list_addon_domains. It states exactly what the tool does.
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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_domains or list_addon_domains. The description offers only the basic operation without context or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.