list_domain_groupsLists domain groups configured on an iKuai router, so you can inspect or manage traffic rules and filtering categories.
列出域名分组
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context of its own, such as return volume, grouping structure, or whether results are scoped to a specific domain set, so it contributes nothing beyond the structured fields.
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?
It is a single front-loaded phrase with zero waste, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, carrying no more information than the tool name.
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?
With an output schema present, the return values need not be explained, and with zero parameters and readOnlyHint the safety profile is covered. Still, for a domain-group listing tool the description could note the scope or context of the groups, which it omits.
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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify or compensate for.
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 verb+resource ('list domain groups'), so the basic action is understandable. However, it is essentially a direct restatement of the tool name and title, adding no distinguishing detail versus siblings like list_ip_groups or list_mac_groups.
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?
There is no statement of when to use this tool, when not to, or which alternatives exist among the many other list_* tools. The agent must infer usage 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.