get_organization_domains

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It covers output format variants, pagination behavior, page_size limits, and the save_to_file side effect that writes to a temp file and returns its path. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond a simple read operation.

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 Args/Returns structure is clear and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. Every parameter line adds semantic value beyond the schema, with no filler or 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 fully covers the input parameters, output behavior, output format options, and file-saving side effect. For a read-only domain retrieval tool with an output schema available, nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents every parameter and adds details the schema lacks: page starts at 1, page_size max is 1000, output_format has enumerated values and a default, and save_to_file explains its side effect. This is excellent parameter-level guidance.

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 action and resource: getting all domains for a specific organization. This clearly distinguishes it from global domain tools like list_domains, get_domain, and search_domains among the siblings.

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 a specific organization' implies when this tool should be used, but the description does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion conditions. Usage guidance is present but left to inference rather than stated directly.

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