retrieve_domain

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond the URL template — no note on what the response contains, whether a 404 occurs for unknown domains, or whether the lookup is authoritative versus the availability check sibling.

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?

It is short, but the second sentence is a verbatim duplicate of the first, so half the text is waste. The endpoint template is front-loaded and useful, but nothing about the resource or conditions follows it.

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 single-domain lookup with no output schema, the description should say what is returned (registration status, nameservers, expiry) and how it differs from list_domains. With rich annotations carrying the safety profile, the gap is behavioral and discoverability rather than safety, but it is still substantial.

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 100% and both parameters (domain, x-trace-id) are documented in the schema, so the schema does the work here. The only extra hint is that 'domain' is a path segment, visible from [GET /v1/domains/{domain}], which is marginal.

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 text restates the tool name and annotation title ('List specific domain') with no added detail, and the verb 'List' is misleading for a single-resource fetch keyed by {domain}. The endpoint path hints at the resource, but an agent cannot distinguish this from the sibling list_domains without opening the schema.

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 given on when to call this versus list_domains (all domains), update_domain, cancel_domain, or validate_domain_availability. The word 'List' actively pushes an agent toward the wrong sibling, so the definition leaves selection entirely to inference.

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