list_dns_domains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context by naming the underlying data source (pdns/list_domains), but it says nothing about result size, pagination, or ordering for what could be a large list.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriate for a no-argument list tool. The one flaw is the broken character encoding, which degrades legibility without adding any value.

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, zero-parameter list with no output schema, the description plus annotations give the agent enough to call it correctly. Return-shape and pagination details are the only omissions, and those are minor here.

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 schema carries no semantics to explain and the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond noting that no filtering arguments exist, which is implicit.

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+resource: it lists all of the user's domains, and it names the backing source (the pdns/list_domains table). That distinguishes it from siblings like list_dns_zones and list_dns_subdomains, though it never explicitly contrasts with them. The garbled Cyrillic encoding (mojibake) hurts readability but the meaning is recoverable.

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 guidance on when to use this versus the many sibling DNS tools (list_dns_zones, get_dns_zone, list_dns_subdomains) or on any prerequisites. The agent must infer that this returns the domain-level inventory rather than zones or records.

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