List IT Glue Domains

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

Annotations already indicate this is a read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world operation. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it explains what domains track ('domain registrations and their expiration dates'), mentions optional filtering, and specifies the return content ('List of domains with registrar and expiration info'). This enhances behavioral understanding without contradicting annotations, though it doesn't cover aspects like rate limits or authentication needs.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized: it starts with a clear purpose statement, adds context in a second sentence, then details parameters and returns in separate sections. Every sentence earns its place by providing useful information. However, the 'Args' section is somewhat redundant given the schema's 100% coverage, slightly reducing efficiency, but the overall flow is logical and front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, domain context, parameters, and return values. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the description specifying return content. However, it could be more comprehensive by explaining pagination behavior or error handling, but for a list tool with good annotations, this is sufficient.

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%, meaning all parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description lists parameters in an 'Args' section, but this mostly repeats schema information (e.g., 'page (number): Page number (default: 1)') without adding significant semantic value. It does clarify that 'include' can fetch 'passwords for related credentials,' which slightly expands on the schema's enum, but overall, the description doesn't compensate beyond the schema's thorough documentation.

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 purpose: 'List domains in IT Glue with optional filtering.' It specifies the verb ('List') and resource ('domains in IT Glue'), and the second sentence adds context about what domains track. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'itglue_get_domain' (singular) or 'itglue_list_expirations', which might overlap in functionality, preventing a perfect score.

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 usage through the phrase 'with optional filtering,' suggesting it's for retrieving multiple domains with customization. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'itglue_get_domain' (for a single domain) or 'itglue_list_expirations' (which might list domains based on expiration dates). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context partially inferred.

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