domain_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds 'unpaginated' (all results at once) and scope 'connected to the current workspace', which provide behavioral context beyond annotations. 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value: what it does, scope, why to use it. No wasted words.

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 zero parameters, rich annotations, and presence of output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and key behavioral trait (unpaginated). No gaps for this simple list 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?

Input schema has zero parameters, schema coverage 100%. Per guidelines, 0 parameters earns baseline 4. Description does not need to add parameter info; it correctly highlights that no inputs are required.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'list', resource 'domains', scope 'connected to the current workspace', and property 'unpaginated'. It differentiates from sibling tools like domain_get (single domain) by implying this returns all. The phrase 'audit configured sender domains and choose one for follow-up actions' adds practical purpose.

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 tells when to use: 'audit configured sender domains and choose one for follow-up actions'. Does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but context of sibling tools (e.g., domain_get for single domain) makes usage clear. Slight deduction for lack of explicit exclusion.

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