gtm_plan_domain_intelligence

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

No annotations provided. The description only mentions routing details (JWT, tenant, company scope) which are internal. It does not disclose whether the action is read-only, modifies state, or has any side effects. The behavioral impact is unclear.

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 reasonably short but includes implementation details (dispatcher routing under JWT, tenant, company) that are not directly helpful for an AI agent. The args section is clear. Some pruning could improve conciseness.

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?

The tool has no required parameters and no annotation. Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description omits what the action plans or produces. It lacks sufficient information for an agent to decide when and how to use this tool effectively.

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 description adds meaningful context to both parameters beyond the schema: 'message' is a free-text objective, 'inputs' is an optional JSON string of structured inputs. The schema itself has 0% description coverage, so this explanation is valuable.

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 essentially restates the tool name ('Run the gtm domain agent action `plan_domain_intelligence`') without explaining what the action actually does. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like crm_plan_domain_intelligence or commerce_plan_domain_intelligence.

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 vs. the many other domain-specific plan_domain_intelligence tools. No prerequisites, context, or alternatives are mentioned.

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