get_domain_nameservers

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the tool is read-only, that replacing nameservers is a write operation not exposed, and that the domain ID is sourced from list_domains. This provides clear behavioral context without contradiction.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or missing information.

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 description is largely complete for a simple read tool, but it does not specify the return format (e.g., list of strings). However, the purpose is clear enough without output schema. Minor gap in completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter already described. The description's mention that 'The id comes from list_domains' aligns with the schema description, adding no new semantic meaning beyond confirming the source.

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 specifies 'Get the nameservers currently set on an owned domain' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_domain_nameservers by noting that replacing is a separate write operation not exposed as an MCP tool.

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 'Use to see the domain's delegation before recommending a change.' Provides context and a prerequisite: 'The id comes from list_domains.' Implicitly advises when not to use (for writing changes) by noting the write tool is unavailable.

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