List website subdomains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it retrieves all subdomains and states the returned information includes parent domain and root directory. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 two sentences with the main action front-loaded in the first sentence. The second sentence adds relevant return-value context without excessive detail or 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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation and mentions key return fields. However, it leaves ambiguity around the 'username' and 'domain' parameters and does not fully specify the response shape or edge cases like an empty subdomain list.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not clarify parameter semantics further; 'domain' is described only as 'Domain name' and 'username' as 'username parameter', which is weak, but the description at least frames the operation as targeting a specific website.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve all subdomains created under the selected website.' It clearly identifies what the tool returns and is distinct from siblings like hosting_createWebsiteSubdomainV1 and hosting_deleteWebsiteSubdomainV1.

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 provides clear context for use: 'Use this endpoint to inspect subdomain configuration for a specific website.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the inspect/list framing implies that modification tools should be used for creating or deleting subdomains.

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