list_domain_blacklist

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'List' verb is consistent. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context such as response format, pagination, or specific data fields, which would be useful for a list operation. The annotation carries the safety information, so this is adequate but not enhanced.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the purpose. The parenthetical tab reference is brief and does not clutter the description. No wasted words.

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 simplicity of a zero-parameter list with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it does not provide any context about what the blacklist contains or how it relates to sibling tools like list_url_blacklist, which could help the agent choose correctly. Still, the tool is straightforward, and the lack of depth is acceptable, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema confirms this (coverage 100%). With no parameters to explain, the description is not required to add parameter-level detail. This matches the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 ('List') and the resource ('prohibited entertainment websites'), which aligns with the tool name. It is specific enough to be understood, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool list_url_blacklist, which could also involve entertainment content. The tab reference adds some context but does not resolve potential ambiguity.

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 list_url_blacklist or add/delete_domain_blacklist. The description does not mention any exclusions or preferred usage contexts, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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