get_referring_domains

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'Credits: varies' but does not describe whether the tool is read-only, any permission needs, rate limits, or what happens on failure. The behavior around 'authority scores' is also undefined.

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 short at three sentences, but it omits important context. The first sentence defines purpose, but the last two about API key and balance are useful yet brief. It is not excessively wordy but could be improved with more detail without becoming verbose.

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 complexity (3 parameters, output schema, sibling tools), the description is very incomplete. It does not explain what 'authority scores' are, how to interpret results, or any pagination/limit behavior. The output schema exists but the description should add context.

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 does not explain any of the three parameters (domain, location, limit). It adds no meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to guess their semantics.

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 action 'Get referring domains' and the resource 'with authority scores', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_backlinks or get_competitors. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 only mentions the API key requirement and a reference to check balance via get_account_info. It does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_backlinks or get_competitors, nor does it explain conditions for use.

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