Bulk Domain Availability Check

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by detailing the response structure (array with domain, domainAvailability, status) and a critical behavioral caveat (verify status). 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?

The description is three sentences: first states purpose, second explains output structure, third gives a crucial warning. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return format and a safety check. It does not cover error handling or rate limits, but annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) provide some context. For a bulk check tool, it is reasonably complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not repeat parameter details, but the schema sufficiently documents them (domain_names with maxItems and example, source with enum and default). The description adds no extra parameter semantics.

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 the action ('check domain name availability'), the resource ('domain name'), and the scope ('up to 100 domains at once'). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'domain_check_availability' (single domain) and 'domain_check_availability_with_suggestions'.

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 provides clear guidance on interpreting results ('Always verify status before trusting domainAvailability'), but does not explicitly mention when to use this bulk tool over the single domain alternative. The bulk aspect is implicit.

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