list_domains

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It implies a read-only list operation and explains type filtering, but does not discuss output format, pagination, or any side effects. The additional behavior described is minimal beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word adds value, with no filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter list tool, the description covers purpose, type usage, and parameter meaning. It is reasonably complete given the low complexity and absence of an output schema, though it does not specify the returned fields or 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 both parameters already described in the input schema. The description restates the type enum in slightly different words and adds the prov requirement context, but does not significantly extend beyond the schema's built-in descriptions.

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 lists BPS domains/regions (province, regency/city), with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by its focus on geographic domains and provides type options.

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 explicit usage instructions for each type value ('prov', 'kab', 'kabbyprov'), telling the user exactly which option to use for different needs. Does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when-not to use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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