adt_create_domain

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behaviors: creation in a package (default $TMP), optional activation, naming constraints, and return of object URI and activation status. It does not cover auth or rate limits, but for a creation tool this is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences front-loading the main action, concise with no filler. Every sentence provides essential information (purpose, parameters, constraints, return values).

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 tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers creation, defaults, naming, activation, and return values. It does not explain error handling or side effects, but is adequate for selecting and using the 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context like 'default $TMP' and 'local/no transport' and clarifies activation is optional, but largely rephrases schema descriptions. It adds moderate value beyond the schema.

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 creates a DDIC domain with specific technical attributes (type, length, decimals) and mentions the naming constraint (Z*/Y* prefix). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like adt_create_dataelement or adt_create_table.

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 explains what the tool does but does not explicitly indicate when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The context is implied through the object name (domain), but no direct guidance on selecting this tool over siblings like adt_create_dataelement or adt_create_table.

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