query_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only implies a read operation ('Query') but does not mention side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or whether the tool is safe to call repeatedly. The description lacks necessary transparency.

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 relatively concise (two sentences plus arg/return spec) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the arg/return formatting is slightly verbose for a tool description. Overall efficient.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema) and the presence of sibling tools, the description covers the basic operation but lacks usage context and behavioral details. It does not explain what 'all DNS records' entails or how results are structured.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides a minimal explanation of the 'domain' parameter with an example (e.g., example.com). This adds some meaning beyond the schema's type definition, but it remains basic and does not specify format or validation rules.

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 it queries 'all DNS records' from DNSDumpster for a domain, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on specific record types (get_a_records, etc.) or subdomain search. The verb 'Query' is generic but appropriate, and the resource is well-specified.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like individual record queries or search_subdomains. It does not specify when a comprehensive query is preferable or mention any prerequisites or limitations.

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