Info Domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. 'Fetch' indicates a read-only operation and the examples show expected output fields, but it does not mention permissions, error conditions, or response structure beyond the examples.

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. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only tool, the description is mostly complete: it states the purpose and example return fields. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance and parameter format, so it is not fully self-sufficient, though the low complexity keeps the gap minor.

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 schema has only one parameter, 'domain', with 0% description coverage. The description says 'for a domain' but adds little beyond the parameter name—no format, example, or constraints are given. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate more.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') with a clear resource ('registration details') and sample fields (status, expiration, nameservers), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like check_domain or info_contact.

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 implies when to use it (for domain registration details) but gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or when not to use it. It does not mention exclusions or compare to sibling tools.

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