ecp_nginx_list_domains

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly communicates a read-only listing operation and scopes it to nginx configs on this container. However, it does not describe output format, potential empty results, pagination, or other behavioral nuances, though these are less critical for a zero-parameter list 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?

A single, focused sentence states the operation, resource, and scope without any filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it identifies what is listed and under what scope. It could optionally mention the return type explicitly, but 'List' makes the outcome reasonably clear without requiring more 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?

The input schema has no properties and there are zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to clarify. The description does not need to compensate for schema gaps since the schema coverage is trivially complete.

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 a clear resource ('domains that have an nginx config on this container'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. The scope also helps distinguish it from generic domain-listing siblings like ecp_domains_list_all or ecp_domains_list_additional.

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 usage context is implied by the description: an agent should call this when it needs domains that have an nginx config on this container. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over related domain/nginx tools, nor does it state any exclusions or alternatives.

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