sf_list_domains

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states the read-only listing behavior and the optional filtering, which is adequate for a simple list tool. It does not mention edge cases like invalid service values, but that is not a significant omission for this operation type.

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, well-structured sentence that begins with the action and resource, immediately conveying the tool's purpose. It includes the optionality of the filter without unnecessary detail. Every word adds 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequately complete. It explains the entire scope of functionality. It does not elaborate on response format, but the absence of an output schema lessens that need. Slight room for additional context about the nature of 'domains' but not critical.

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 schema already fully describes the 'service' parameter with examples ('analytics', 'commerce', 'industries', 'platform'), so schema coverage is 100%. The description's mention of 'optionally filtered by service category' adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline of 3.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('all available Salesforce documentation domains'), and the optional filtering mechanism. It effectively distinguishes this from sibling tools like sf_set_active_domains or sf_suggest_domains by focusing on enumeration.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: to obtain a list of documentation domains, optionally narrowed by service category. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to distinguish it from search or read operations.

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