listRegisteredNameServers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List' and clarifies 'glue' nameservers, but it does not disclose that the operation is read-only, any domain prerequisites, or what response the caller should expect. The parenthetical adds a small amount of semantic context, but most behavioral traits are left to the API reference link.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the API-reference link is compact. It earns its place by stating the action and resource clearly, though it does not provide deeper operational guidance.

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 is simple and the schema fully documents the required parameter, so a long description is not necessary. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the absence of return-value or usage-alternative information leaves a modest gap; the API-reference link partially compensates.

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 input schema already documents the sole parameter 'domain' with 100% coverage. The description's phrase 'for a domain' adds no meaningful information beyond what the schema provides, so the schema-driven baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb, 'List', and a specific resource, 'registered (glue) nameservers for a domain'. The parenthetical 'glue' adds a meaningful distinction from ordinary nameserver operations and from sibling mutation tools such as add/modify/delete. It is clear, though it does not explicitly contrast with related sibling tools like changeNameServers.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives; there are no conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools. The only implied usage is 'for a domain,' which is too thin to help an agent decide between this and the many related nameserver operations.

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