Получение заявки на домен

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

The description only says 'returns details' and adds no context about side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior. The annotations are contradictory (readOnlyHint=false for a GET operation), and the description does not clarify or compensate for this, leaving ambiguity about the tool's actual behavior.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose without redundancy.

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 get-by-ID tool, the description covers the essential purpose, but since there is no output schema, it does not specify the actual fields or structure of the returned 'details'. It also doesn't address error scenarios or the conflicting annotations, leaving notable gaps for a complete understanding.

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 schema already documents request_id as the mandatory field with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces 'by its ID' but adds no additional semantic detail such as format, examples, or constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Возвращает' - returns), the resource ('заявки на регистрацию/продление/трансфер' - requests for registration/renewal/transfer), and the lookup method ('по её ID' - by its ID). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_domain_requests, which would list requests.

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 implies usage for fetching a single request by ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_domain_requests or update_domain_request. No exclusions or alternative guidance are provided.

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