list_domain_actions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. The description only states the purpose and parameter; it does not reveal whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authorization, or any side effects or constraints. With zero annotations, this is insufficient.

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: one sentence for purpose and one for the parameter. No fluff, every word earns its place. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource.

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 the tool is simple (list actions) and has an output schema (so return values are documented there), the description is mostly complete. However, it could mention that the domain must be a valid existing domain agent, possibly requiring a prior call to 'list_domains'. Overall, it covers the essentials well.

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%, meaning the schema provides no textual explanations for parameters. The description adds value by describing the 'domain' parameter with examples ('finance', 'crm', 'legal'), which helps the agent understand what values are expected. This goes beyond the minimal 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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'available actions for a specific domain agent'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_domains' (which lists domains) and domain-specific action tools by specifying it returns actions for a given 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 description implies when to use (when an agent needs to see available actions for a domain) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it, prerequisites (like validating the domain via list_domains), or alternatives (e.g., directly invoking a domain agent). Usage is implied but not clarified.

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