ipoll_resolve

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool performs a lookup and returns capabilities, trust score, endpoint, and registration date. However, it does not mention side effects, idempotency, authentication, or rate limits.

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 concise: a short analogy, then structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy or fluff.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool does, its inputs, and its return fields. Minor omissions like error handling or pagination do not significantly detract.

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 provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage). The description adds meaning by explaining the 'domain' parameter as an agent name or .aint domain with examples ('root_idd' or 'root_idd.aint'), which compensates well for the schema gap.

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 resolves .aint domains, analogous to DNS for AI agents. The verb 'resolve' and resource '.aint domain' are specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ipoll_agents or ipoll_status.

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 looking up agent information by domain ('like DNS'), but it does not provide explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tools. The sibling tools are listed without guidance.

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