Get vCDN domain

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

The description merely restates the tool's function without adding behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not mention error handling, permissions, or any side effects, and openWorldHint is not elaborated.

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 concise sentence with no redundant information. It is efficiently front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

While the tool has a simple one-parameter schema and read-only annotation, the description lacks detail on what 'details' are returned or errors. It is minimally viable but leaves the agent without full context, especially given no output schema.

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 input schema fully documents domain_id with a description, and the tool description adds no parameter semantics. With 100% schema coverage, the description need not repeat this information, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 operation ('Get') and the resource ('details of one Video CDN domain'), specifying singularity. It distinguishes from list_vcdn_domains which lists multiple domains, though it doesn't name alternative tools explicitly.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_vcdn_resource or list_vcdn_domains. The description is purely functional and lacks context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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