list_domains

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It also adds the response field list and account scope, providing some extra context. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, result ordering, or potential open-world breadth beyond the openWorldHint annotation.

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?

One sentence, immediately front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by a concise list of returned fields. No fluff or redundant explanation.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple listing tool, and the parameter schema covers pagination-related fields. However, with no output schema, the description could have mentioned pagination semantics (e.g., default page, how to use the token) or result sorting to be more 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?

All 7 parameters have schema descriptions covering 100% of them, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The tool description does not add parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('domains owned by the GoDaddy account'), and enumerates the returned attributes. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_domain (single domain) and list_dns_records (DNS records).

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 the use case: list all account-owned domains with details. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over get_domain (single domain lookup) or other sibling tools. The guidance is sufficient but not directive.

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