List Domains

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

The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by clarifying the scope ('shared domains and any custom domains') and disclosing that verification status is shown. This gives the agent useful behavioral context about what the tool returns without needing an output schema.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundant information. Every word earns its place, making it highly scannable for an AI agent.

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 simple one-parameter list tool, the description covers the essential return value (verification status) and scope. Without an output schema it could detail the response format more, but the description is adequate for confident tool selection.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description ('The project whose domains to list') is fully sufficient. The description's mention of 'ULink project' adds minor context but doesn't materially enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 lists all domains for a ULink project, specifying that it includes shared and custom domains and shows verification status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_domain, verify_domain, and delete_domain, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 context is clear: this is the tool to use when you need to list domains for a project. While there's no explicit 'when not to use' or mention of alternatives, the sibling list makes it obvious that this is the read-only listing counterpart to domain mutation tools.

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