search_subdomains

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

With no annotations, the description provides some behavioral context: pagination is limited to Plus accounts and returns a formatted string. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or that the operation is read-only.

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 with a clear main line, Args section, and Returns section. It is front-loaded. Minor redundancy exists but 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 no output schema or annotations, the description covers the basics: purpose, parameters, and return type. However, it lacks details on error handling, prerequisites, or the return format's structure, leaving gaps for the agent.

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, but the description explains both parameters: 'domain' with context and example, 'page' with pagination and account restriction. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/title.

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 searches for subdomains of a given domain, using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools which handle specific DNS record types or general domain queries.

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 discovering subdomains but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_a_records for A records). No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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