search_domains

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that search is read-only and returns available names across TLDs. It does not mention potential external calls, rate limits, or side effects, but for a search tool this is adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences: first states purpose and example, second gives critical note, third directs to sibling. Front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description only vaguely says 'Returns available names across TLDs' without details on format, errors, or pagination. Also does not differentiate from check_domain, leaving some 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 coverage is 100% (baseline 3). The description adds value by specifying that query should be without TLD and providing examples for both parameters, clarifying usage beyond 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 verb 'Search for available domains' and the resource 'for a site', with an example 'mybakery'. It also distinguishes from connect_domain, a sibling for user-owned domains.

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?

Explicitly states agents cannot buy domains (user confirms purchase) and directs to connect_domain for owned domains. However, lacks differentiation from check_domain, another sibling.

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