sf_set_active_domains

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the global restriction effect and the clear behavior, but it omits persistence, override semantics, and any permission requirements. It adds useful behavioral context but does not fully carry the burden for a state-changing tool.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the active-verb opener, and no redundancy or filler. Every sentence contributes purpose, usage guidance, or clear behavior.

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 low-complexity stateful setter, the description covers the core purpose, prerequisite discovery step, and removal instructions. It is sufficient for the tool's simplicity, though persistence and override details are not addressed.

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 covers both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds the recommendation to use sf_suggest_domains for domain IDs and mentions clear=true, but it does not go beyond the schema's existing parameter descriptions with new semantics or edge cases.

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 verb 'Set' with the resource 'active domain restriction' is specific. It clarifies global scope ('all tools only return results') and distinguishes it from discovery siblings like sf_suggest_domains and sf_list_domains.

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 instructs to use sf_suggest_domains first to discover domain IDs and specifies clear=true to remove restrictions. It provides clear when-to-use context but does not state when not to use or offer alternatives beyond the discovery prerequisite.

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