Get domain

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds real value beyond them: the API-key permission requirement and the crucial interpretation rule that queued/waiting DNSSEC transition states are not completed. It does not discuss caching or pagination, but for a single-item read that gap is minor.

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 compact sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by result-interpretation nuance and the auth requirement. The DNSSEC sentence is narrow but non-redundant since it prevents misreading a state value; nothing is 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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming what is returned (nameservers, pending action, dnssec_transition steps) and how to read the transition states. For a one-parameter read tool this is nearly complete, with only explicit sibling routing left out.

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% and the single domain_id parameter is documented in the schema as 'Owned domain ID from list_domains', including its integer constraints. The description does not mention the parameter at all, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one owned domain') and adds scope detail — current nameservers plus any pending domain action — that tells the agent this is a single-resource read rather than a listing. The contrast with list_domains is inferable from 'one owned domain' but no sibling is named explicitly.

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 implies this is the tool for inspecting a single domain's current state, but never states when to choose it over list_domains or get_domain_ordering_status. The auth prerequisite ('Requires domains:read when using an API key') is useful context but is a precondition, not usage guidance.

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