dynadot_get_transfer_auth_code

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic action without disclosing side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens after retrieval (e.g., code is displayed or emailed). Minimal behavioral context.

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?

One sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the verb and object. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so a minimal description can suffice. However, given the lack of annotations, the description could include prerequisites or typical usage context to be fully complete. Adequate but with gaps.

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%, but the description adds no information about the 'domainName' parameter beyond its type. No format, example, or constraints are provided, leaving the agent to infer meaning.

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 retrieves the authorization (EPP) code for transferring a domain away. It uses a specific verb ('retrieve') and resource ('authorization code'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'dynadot_set_transfer_auth_code' and 'dynadot_authorize_transfer_away'.

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 (e.g., 'dynadot_authorize_transfer_away' or 'dynadot_set_transfer_auth_code'). There is no mention of prerequisites like domain lock status or transfer readiness.

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