pve_list_domains

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'List' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, output format, pagination, or error conditions. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient phrase ('List authentication domains/realms') with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple list tool and front-loads the essential 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's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral context (e.g., what 'domains/realms' means in this system, output format). For a list tool with no structured metadata, it should provide more context about the returned data.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline for zero parameters. No additional parameter information is required or provided.

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 resource ('authentication domains/realms'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on domains/realms rather than other entities like VMs, containers, or nodes. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar list tools (e.g., pve_list_users, pve_list_groups) beyond the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or compare it to other list tools (e.g., pve_list_users for user domains). Without any usage context, the agent must infer based on the name alone.

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