domains_getOutgoingDomainMoveV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavior: 'Returns 404 when the domain has no move in progress,' and clarifies the move is 'you have initiated.' However, it does not describe the success response shape, other error conditions, or whether any special permissions or prerequisites are needed.

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 three sentences long, each earning its place: the first states the action, the second communicates a critical error condition, and the third gives usage context. It is front-loaded, clear, and free of fluff.

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?

For a simple single-parameter GET tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, the 404 edge case, and the intended usage scenario. It does not detail the response structure, but since no output schema exists, this is less critical. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 only parameter 'domain' is fully described in the schema as 'Domain name,' giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds the context of 'a specified domain' and 'single domain' but provides no additional format or validation details, so it meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 opens with 'Retrieve the outgoing move for a specified domain,' providing a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this single-domain retrieval from siblings like domains_getOutgoingDomainMoveListV1 by emphasizing 'a specified domain' and 'single domain.'

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 explicitly says 'Use this endpoint to track the status of a move you have initiated for a single domain,' giving clear operational context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'single domain' wording separates it from the list variant, and the context is sufficient for selection.

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