get_email_domains

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

Description indicates it retrieves 'all available' domains, implying a read-only list operation. However, with no annotations provided, the description does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or guarantee no side effects. For a simple list retrieval, this is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 sentence that immediately states the action and resource. No wasted words; it is as concise as possible for a list operation.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and a straightforward purpose, the description is largely complete. It could mention that the result is a list of domain strings, but the lack of output schema does not heavily penalize this simple tool.

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 no parameters, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it appropriately omits them. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 action ('获取' meaning 'get') and the resource ('邮箱域名' meaning 'email domains'), with a specific scope ('系统中所有可用的' meaning 'all available in the system'). It is distinct from sibling tools like create_email, delete_email, etc., which operate on individual emails or messages.

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, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. There are no hints about typical use cases or scenarios where this tool is preferred over other tools.

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