list_dns_domains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description's only extra content is the internal source ('domains table (pdns/list_domains)'), which is implementation detail rather than behavior; it says nothing about pagination, result size, auth scope, or filtering.

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 short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. The parenthetical endpoint reference is marginal value for an agent but costs almost nothing in length.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is essentially sufficient. The remaining gap is not clarifying how this list differs from list_dns_zones/list_dns_subdomains.

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 there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline applies; the description cannot and need not explain parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all user domains') and even names the backing table/endpoint, so the action is unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as list_dns_zones or list_dns_subdomains, leaving the domains-vs-zones boundary for the agent to infer.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to alternatives despite several overlapping DNS listing tools in the sibling set. The agent gets no signal about which listing tool applies to which situation.

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