list_auth_domains

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

The description does not contradict missing annotations but lacks explicit behavioral details such as side effects, permissions required, or output format. As a simple list tool, the behavior is inferable but not explicitly stated.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, output schema provided), the description is largely complete. It could briefly mention the return format, but the output schema covers that. Slight lack of completeness regarding what 'configured' means, but acceptable.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is appropriate given zero parameters. Baseline score of 4 applies.

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 action ('List') and resource ('configured authentication realms/domains') with examples (PAM, PVE, LDAP, AD, OpenID), distinguishing it from sibling list tools and the singular 'get_auth_domain'.

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 description implies usage for retrieving all authentication domains but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_auth_domain' or other list tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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