get_domain

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the returned field set; it does not say what happens for an unknown domain, whether the lookup is live/registrar-sourced, or whether it can be rate-limited.

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?

One efficient sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource; the returned fields are listed compactly with no filler. It is a touch terse, but every word earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the behavioral profile. What is missing for a correct call is parameter guidance (domain name vs. numeric ID) and any error semantics; adequate but with a clear gap.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single parameter, and the schema's anyOf (string OR positive integer) is genuinely ambiguous — it implies a domain name or possibly a numeric domain ID. The description adds nothing to disambiguate name vs. ID format, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Get domain') plus the concrete fields returned (registration, expiry, nameservers, enabled services), so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling list_domains or explain the singular-vs-plural relationship.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as list_domains for enumeration, and no prerequisites (e.g., whether the domain must already exist in the account or whether this triggers a live registrar lookup). Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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