get_domain_contacts

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

Declares read-only nature and registrar-dependence, but without annotations, the description should also disclose return format, errors (e.g., domain not found), or auth requirements. It does not, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with main action. Every sentence adds value: what it does, when to use, source of id. No redundancy.

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 tool simplicity (1 param, no output schema, no nested objects), description covers main aspects. However, lacking description of return value (e.g., contact fields) slightly reduces completeness for an agent without output schema.

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 provides the 'id' parameter description. Description adds value by specifying the source ('from list_domains'), which aids agent in correctly obtaining the id. No further syntax/format details needed for single param.

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?

Description clearly states verb (Get) and resource (registrant WHOIS contact on owned domain), with context 'registrar-dependent' and purpose 'review who domain is registered to.' While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling domain tools like get_domain or set_domain_contacts, the intent is unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('review who the domain is registered to') and when not to ('updating is write not exposed as tool yet'). Also provides prerequisite ('id comes from list_domains'), giving complete usage guidance.

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