Get Auth Code

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that the tool retrieves an auth/EPP code, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, whether the domain must be unlocked, whether any notification is sent, or other potential side effects. This is a significant transparency gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the action, resource, and purpose, making it appropriately concise.

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 tool is simple with one fully documented parameter, but the description does not explain the return format or any conditions/preconditions (e.g., domain lock status). Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate for a basic getter but leaves some gaps around expected response and prerequisites.

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 fully documents the single 'domain' parameter with a clear description ('Domain name'), so the description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is 100%.

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's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('domain authorization/EPP code'), and adds context for its intended use ('for transfers'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like domains_get_details or domains_get_transfers.

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 phrase 'for transfers' implies the usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as domains_get_transfers or domains_get_transfer. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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