get_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the authentication requirement (PROOF_API_KEY or start_login) and the retry behavior after opening a session. It does not explicitly say it is read-only, but 'Get details' strongly implies a safe retrieval operation.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one clear sentence, followed by concise access instructions. The access block is slightly verbose but contains essential operational detail, so every part 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?

For a low-complexity read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it states what the tool returns and how to get access. It does not explain how to obtain a domain ID, but that is reasonably covered by sibling list_domains, and no critical calling information is missing.

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 single parameter 'id' is already fully described in the schema as 'Domain ID', so schema coverage is 100%. The description only repeats the concept of 'by ID' without adding format, source, or additional meaning.

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 action ('Get details of a specific domain by ID') and the resource, and even enumerates the key information returned: verification status, DNS records, and provider connections. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_domains or verify_domain.

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 phrase 'by ID' gives clear context: use this when you already have a specific domain ID and want its details. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the access instructions explain how to authenticate and retry after starting a login session, which is helpful usage guidance.

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