pmg_domains_list

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses read-only nature, config requirement, and return type (list of domain dicts with domain name + comment). Does not cover edge cases or error conditions, but sufficient for a simple list tool.

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?

Two sentences only: first states purpose and config, second explains output and management alternatives. Front-loaded and efficient with no redundant words.

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?

Given tool simplicity (one optional parameter, no nested objects, output schema exists), description covers purpose, safety, config, output shape, and related tools. Agent has sufficient information to use correctly.

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 covers 100% of parameters (proximo_target described). Description adds no additional parameter info beyond schema, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'list PMG managed mail domains' with verb 'list' and specific resource. Explicitly marks as 'READ-ONLY', and differentiates from sibling tools pmg_domain_create/pmg_domain_delete by referencing them for management.

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?

Indicates when to use (listing domains) and mentions config prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PMG_* config'. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but sibling references provide context.

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