domain_age

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals the cost ($0.001 USDC via x402) and general category, but fails to describe what actions the tool performs, what inputs it expects, or what output it returns. The cost disclosure is useful but insufficient.

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 extremely brief, but its brevity stems from under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It reads as a label, not a functional description, and does not provide enough substance to be useful.

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 a generic schema, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is drastically incomplete. It neither explains the tool's purpose, input requirements, return behavior, nor differentiates it from many sibling network/security tools. The agent would have to guess almost everything.

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 input schema is a generic wrapper ('params' object) with no specific property names or descriptions. The description does not mention a domain name parameter or any other required input, leaving the agent without clues about what to pass.

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 merely restates the tool name ('domain age') and categorizes it as a 'Security & Network tool' without stating what the tool does. There is no verb or explicit resource indicating the function of checking a domain's age.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like whois or dns_lookup. There are no prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusion criteria mentioned.

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