v2_getDomainVerificationsDIRECT

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that it 'retrieves a list', with no information about authentication requirements, side effects, rate limits, or whether it returns data for the current user or all domains. The description does not go beyond the basic action.

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 sentence of 8 words, concise and front-loaded with the verb 'Retrieve'. Every word is necessary; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. While it conveys the core purpose, it lacks information about the scope of the list (e.g., current user, account-wide), pagination, response format, or authentication prerequisites. For a simple retrieval tool without output schema, more context would be helpful.

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 input schema is empty (no parameters), so schema coverage is 100%. For zero-parameter tools, the baseline is 4. The description does not attempt to explain parameters since none exist, which 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a list of pending and completed domain verifications. The verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'domain verifications' are specific, and the tool name includes 'getDomainVerifications' which aligns. Although sibling tools exist for DNS validation and domain ownership verification, this tool's focus on 'domain verifications' (likely a specific concept from the API) distinguishes it adequately.

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. The description simply states what it does without mentioning any context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The sibling list includes related tools like 'DNS_validateDNSRecordsV1' and 'hosting_verifyDomainOwnershipV1', but no comparison is made.

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