audit_domain

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld). Description adds useful details: credit cost, rate limits, TXT filtering logic, and next_calls chaining behavior. No contradictions.

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?

Somewhat long but well-structured: starts with purpose, then filtering, usage, chaining, rates, return fields. Each sentence adds value, though slightly dense.

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 complexity and rich schema/annotations, description fully covers the tool's operation, chaining, filtering, and output. No gaps given output schema exists.

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 good parameter descriptions. Description adds extra value for include_all_txt by explaining the filtering rationale and when to set true.

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 it performs a comprehensive domain audit combining passive and active checks, listing components and return fields. It distinguishes from domain_report for passive-only assessment, avoiding confusion with siblings.

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 when to use this tool vs domain_report, and provides chaining guidance with subdomain_enum and ssl_check via next_calls. Also mentions rate limits and credit costs, aiding decision-making.

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