get_domain_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' transparently implies a read-only operation with no side effects, but it does not explicitly state that, nor does it mention any preconditions like the domain needing to exist. This is adequate but minimal.

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 zero wasted words. It states the verb, resource, and scope efficiently.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain what the tool returns. 'Detailed information' is vague—an agent cannot know if this includes DNS records, PHP settings, SSL status, or other domain-specific data. For a domain-info tool with no structured schema, this is a significant 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 100% (the 'domain' parameter is described as 'Domain name'). The tool description adds little beyond the schema—it just says 'specific domain,' which aligns with the parameter. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific domain'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like list_domains or get_ssl_status. However, it does not enumerate what 'detailed information' includes, so it falls short of a 5.

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 phrase 'specific domain' implies this is for retrieving details about one domain rather than listing all domains (list_domains). It provides no explicit alternatives or exclusionary guidance, but the usage context is clear enough for a simple getter tool.

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