search_domains

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

Discloses it uses RDAP and domainr.com and that no API key is required. However, no annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden; it lacks details on rate limits, result limits, or behavior when query is a full domain.

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: first states purpose, second adds details and examples. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

No output schema, so description should elaborate on return format. It only says 'returns matching domain names with availability status', but doesn't specify structure (e.g., array of objects). Could be more complete.

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% so baseline 3. Description adds value by giving examples (e.g., 'devstroop', 'acme coffee') and explaining what happens when tlds are omitted. This goes beyond the schema.

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 it searches for domain name suggestions and checks availability, with examples like 'devstroop' or 'acme coffee'. Distinguishes from siblings that check specific domains or perform WHOIS lookups.

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?

Provides context that no API key is required and describes input, but does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus check_domain, check_multiple_domains, or whois_lookup. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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