acedatacloud_list_site_domains

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It communicates that only caller-administered domains are returned, but it does not mention pagination, filtering behavior beyond the optional schema params, or any ordering/error traits. For a simple read/list operation this is minimally adequate.

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 one clear, front-loaded sentence with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail. Every word adds semantic value.

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?

With an output schema present and all three optional parameters documented, the one-sentence description is sufficient for a straightforward list operation. It lacks richer context like pagination or sort behavior, but for this apparent complexity level it is adequately complete.

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% and each parameter already has a basic description ('Page or API domain', 'Optional site UUID', 'Optional status'). The tool description adds no extra semantic value about how these filters interact or what accepted status values are, so the baseline score applies.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('custom domains') and adds an ownership scope ('administered by the caller'), which clearly differentiates it from singular get/create/update/verify domain tools. It fully communicates 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?

The description states the basic action but gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_site_domain, verify_site_domain, or check_site_domain. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative recommendations.

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