verify_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates the behavior is a read-only check ('Check') and describes the return value, which is sufficient for a low-risk verification tool. It does not detail permissions or side effects, but none are expected for a check operation.

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 two short sentences or one compact sentence, front-loading the main action and providing essential detail without any fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers the purpose, the return behavior, and even hints at the source of the domain ID via the schema. Nothing critical is missing.

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 only parameter, domainId, already has a clear schema description ('Domain ID to verify (from list_domains)'). The description adds no extra parameter information, so it matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 tool's function: 'Check DNS verification for a domain.' It also specifies the output ('Returns whether it's pointing to PostKing servers and what A record is needed if not'), distinguishing it from sibling domain tools like add_domain or delete_domain.

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 gives clear context that this tool is for verifying DNS status, implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, lacking the exclusionary guidance seen in high-scoring examples.

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