infomaniak_get_domain_full

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the tool returns sensitive data (auth_code) and notes 'Manager-private' (permission requirement). No contradictions. Adds beyond annotations.

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 a single sentence but packs many specific data items. It is front-loaded with 'Full domain detail'. Slightly long but efficient; no wasted words. Could be broken into bullet points for readability, but still good.

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 annotations cover safety and output schema exists (not shown but implied), the description is fairly complete: lists return contents, input format, and permission note. It lacks details on pagination or response size, but being read-only with openWorldHint, this is sufficient.

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%, so the schema already documents the parameter well. The description repeats that it accepts id or FQDN and adds a discovery hint. This is adequate but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the 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 explicitly lists many specific data fields (auth_code, transfer_status, glue records, etc.) and states 'Full domain detail', clearly differentiating from simpler sibling tools like infomaniak_get_domain. The verb 'get' plus 'full' accurately describes the resource and scope.

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 explains how to specify the domain (id or FQDN) and references infomaniak_list_domains for discovery. Although it doesn't explicitly contrast with simpler alternatives, the naming and content imply when to use this comprehensive version. Clear context for usage.

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