tld_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it lists return categories (description, price range, restrictions, popularity), it doesn't specify whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, error conditions, or data freshness. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 efficiently structured: purpose statement, bulleted return categories, and a concrete example. Every sentence earns its place - the bullet points clarify what information is returned, and the example demonstrates usage. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 lookup tool with 2 parameters and 100% schema coverage but no output schema, the description is adequate but has gaps. It specifies what information is returned but not the format or structure. Without annotations, it should ideally mention that this is a read-only operation and any limitations. The example helps but doesn't fully compensate for missing behavioral context.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters well. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it provides an example showing 'tld' parameter usage but doesn't explain the 'detailed' parameter's effect on the returned information. However, with only 2 parameters and excellent schema coverage, the baseline is high.

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 explicitly states 'Get information about a Top Level Domain (TLD)' - a clear verb ('Get information') and resource ('Top Level Domain'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_domain' or 'suggest_domains' by focusing on retrieving metadata about TLDs rather than searching for available domains or making suggestions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'compare_registrars' or 'suggest_domains'. There's no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions. The example shows usage but doesn't explain context or decision criteria for choosing this tool.

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