list_domains

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions listing and verification status but does not disclose if it's read-only, any side effects, or pagination behavior. Basic disclosure but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second gives a usage tip. No extraneous words, front-loaded with key action. Every sentence is necessary and clear.

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?

Adequately covers purpose and filtering hint. No output schema, but description implies return of domains with verification status. Could briefly mention typical use case (e.g., validating domain setup) but is complete enough for a simple list 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds extra context for the 'status' parameter (e.g., 'verified' gives sendable domains). Baseline 3 is appropriate as description adds marginal value beyond schema.

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 it lists sending domains and their verification status, using a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_domain (single domain) and add_domain/verify_domain (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?

Explicitly tells when to use the status parameter ('Pass status=verified to get only sendable domains'). Provides clear context for filtering, though does not explicitly compare with alternatives. Since sibling tools are distinct, this is sufficient.

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