List All Domains (Full)

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses auto-pagination behavior but this is essentially a restatement of the tool name. It omits return format, potential large data volume, or any safety implications. Minimal value added beyond the name.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded and efficient, but contains redundancy: 'Auto-paginate' and 'handles pagination automatically' say the same thing. Could be tightened without losing meaning.

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, the description adequately explains its core function. However, lacks details about the output structure or any operational caveats, which would be valuable given no output schema or annotations. Still, it's reasonably complete for its simplicity.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. Baseline for 0 params is 4; description doesn't need to explain any parameters.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'fetch' with resource 'ALL domains' and scope 'portfolio', clearly distinguishing from siblings like domains_get_list by emphasizing full retrieval. It concisely states what the tool does.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool (when you need ALL domains without manual pagination) but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. The context is clear enough for an agent to choose this over a paginated listing tool.

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