Get domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-only operation via 'Get' and lists the returned fields, but does not disclose potential error behaviors, authentication requirements, or any side effects. For a simple retrieval, this is adequate but not rich.

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 sentence that efficiently lists the key returned information. No unnecessary words or repetition. It is well-structured and immediately conveys the tool's purpose.

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?

Without an output schema, the description takes on the role of explaining return values, which it does by enumerating specific fields. It does not cover error handling or all edge cases, but for a simple 'get' operation with a single parameter, the description is reasonably 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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for the single parameter 'name' with a clear description ('The domain name, e.g. example.com'). The tool description does not add further parameter semantics, but the schema already fully explains it, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get a single domain's info') and specifies the resource (a domain) along with the exact data returned (catch-all address, forward domain, limits, dates). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_domains (which lists all domains) and get_domain_stats (which likely focuses on statistics).

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 use when you need detailed information about a specific domain, contrasting with listing tools. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for other scenarios. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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