Список заявок на регистрацию/продление/трансфер доменов

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

The description describes a read operation ('Возвращает'), but annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating it is not read-only. This is a direct contradiction; the description does not disclose any potential side effects or behaviors beyond the annotation.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and return fields 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?

The description covers the return fields and operation types, but it fails to address the annotation contradiction and does not explain how this tool differs from related tools like get_domain_request or list_domains. Given the absence of an output schema, the description is the only source of return information, and while it lists fields, it lacks context on side effects or usage distinctions.

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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it doesn't.

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 returns all user requests for domain operations (registration, renewal, transfer) and lists key fields. The verb 'Возвращает' (returns) and resource 'заявки' (requests) distinguish it from other list tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_domain_request or list_domains. The description only states what the tool does, not when to choose it.

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