keyso_get_report_owner_subdomains

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does convey that this is a read-only GET operation returning subdomains, which is a minimal behavioral signal. However, it omits response format, pagination behavior, error conditions, and authentication expectations.

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 compact, front-loaded with the purpose, and each line earns its place: the resource label, HTTP method, path, and a representative request example. There is no redundant filler.

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 an 8-parameter endpoint with no annotations and no output schema, this description is under-specified. It does not describe the response shape, default pagination, meaning of base/filter, or how this endpoint relates to the large family of sibling report tools, so an agent may struggle to use it correctly and confidently.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters. The description's example request adds a concrete illustration for id, base, sort, page, and per_page, but it does not meaningfully explain ambiguous parameters such as base, filter, token, or base_url beyond what the schema provides.

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 identifies the resource as site subdomains and, combined with 'Method: GET' and the path, makes clear this is a retrieval operation. However, it uses a noun phrase ('Поддомены сайта') rather than a full verb phrase, and it does not differentiate itself from the many sibling report_* tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this endpoint versus alternatives such as report_simple_* or report_group_* tools. The example request shows how to call it, but nothing explains selection criteria, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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