Get domain ordering status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two pieces of genuinely useful context beyond the annotations: the required scope (domains:read, API-key path) and the fact that output is redacted ('non-secret'). It stops short of describing the return shape or whether readiness can be partially satisfied.

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, no filler, with the output-character constraint front-loaded before the auth requirement. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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?

With no output schema, the description is the only place the return value could be explained, and 'readiness' remains unexplained – the agent knows it will get non-secret data but not what readiness dimensions are reported. For a zero-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but the central noun of the tool is undefined.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and the description is not obliged to compensate. Baseline 4 applies; there is no parameter ambiguity an agent could trip over.

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 verb ('Show') and resource ('domain ordering readiness') are present, but 'readiness' is left undefined – an agent cannot tell whether this returns required contacts, lock status, eligibility flags, or something else. It also does not differentiate itself from the many sibling ordering/quote tools (quote_domain_register, confirm_domain_register). Purpose is implied rather than stated.

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 only guidance is an auth prerequisite ('Requires domains:read when using an API key'). There is no statement of when to call this versus quote_domain_register or confirm_domain_register, and no exclusion conditions. An agent must infer the place of this tool in the ordering workflow entirely on its own.

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