session_switch_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says the active domain is switched. It does not explain side effects on subsequent session calls, whether the domain must already exist, reversibility, or what happens to the previous active domain.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core behavior. The Args line is minimal and directly tied to the single parameter, with no wasted words or repetitive detail.

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?

Even though the tool has only one parameter and an output schema, the description lacks important context about session state semantics. It does not say how the active domain affects subsequent calls, which sibling tools provide domain options, or whether the switch is scoped to a single request or persists across the session.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but the Args section only says 'domain: Domain to select.' This adds little beyond the parameter name and type, and does not clarify expected format, valid values, or relationship to domains available in the session.

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 uses a specific verb and resource combination — 'Switch the active domain in the session' — clearly identifying both the action and the object. It distinguishes itself from session and domain siblings by scoping to the active session domain, which no other tool description matches.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It merely states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer when a domain switch is appropriate.

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