domain_fetch_domain_history

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

Description goes beyond annotations by specifying read-only, idempotent, no side effects, source (crt.sh), cache duration (4 hours), and return format. All annotations are reinforced and supplemented.

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 informative but somewhat verbose. It front-loads the purpose and behavior, and each sentence adds value. Could be slightly tighter, but still well-structured.

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 one-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, behavioral details, parameter semantics, source, cache, and fallback. The presence of an output schema complements the described return format.

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% with a description for the single parameter. The description repeats the parameter info with an example, adding slight value but not significantly beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the action (fetch historical SSL cert issuance), resource (domain from CT logs), and distinguishes from sibling domain_fetch_ssl_certificate_chain. The verb 'fetch' and resource 'domain history' are specific.

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 states when to use (detect hijacking, audit), when not to (use sibling for current cert), and provides fallback instruction via report_feedback. Contexts are clear and helpful.

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