domain_add

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the endpoint, such as what the add operation does (e.g., adds a domain to the blocklist, whether it can overwrite, or if it requires authentication). No additional transparency is provided.

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 very concise, containing only the endpoint and a parenthetical. It is front-loaded and free of fluff, but it is under-specified, lacking a human-readable explanation. While not as sparse as 'Process', it borders on being a technical reference rather than a proper description.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), a short description could suffice, but this one fails to state the operation's purpose or side effects. The lack of any natural-language explanation makes it incomplete for an agent that needs to understand when and how to invoke it correctly.

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 only 50%, with 'dry_run' having a Russian description and 'domain' having none. The tool description does not compensate by explaining the 'domain' parameter or its role in the API call. Thus, the description adds no semantic value for parameters beyond the sparse 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?

The description consists solely of the API endpoint 'POST /api/v2/blist/domains/add' and a parenthetical 'Python SDK parity'. This implies the tool adds a domain to a blocklist ('blist'), but relies on API jargon and does not explicitly state the action in natural language. It distinguishes from siblings like 'domain_remove' by verb and resource, but lacks clarity for an agent unfamiliar with the SDK.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as 'domain_remove', 'list_allowed_domains', or 'domain_check_verification'. There is no context about prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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