search_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a read-only behavior ('check availability and pricing') and the EUR currency, but gives no details on return format, error cases, or whether pricing is real-time. It is transparent about the core behavior but lacks depth.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds value, and the key outcome (availability + EUR pricing) is stated upfront.

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 tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential behavior the agent needs: it checks availability and provides EUR pricing. It omits minor details like pricing granularity or return type, but the core is adequately 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 50%, with only the 'domain' parameter described. The description adds context by explaining that the tool operates on a TLD and reports EUR pricing, but it does not clarify how 'domain' and 'tld' interact or the expected format for each. It partially compensates for the schema gap but not fully.

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 states a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('domain availability and EUR pricing'), making the tool's core function immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from siblings like whois_lookup (WHOIS data) and list_tlds (TLD enumeration) by focusing on availability and pricing.

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 when one needs to check domain availability and EUR pricing, but it offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it reference alternative sibling tools. Usage context is only implicit.

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