get_deleted_domains

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only 'Fetch' operation, but it does not describe the output shape, result limits, how 'recently' is defined, or any edge cases. The vagueness of 'recently' leaves the time-window behavior under-specified.

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?

A single sentence with no filler and front-loaded scoping information. For a tool with one optional parameter, this is an appropriately concise definition.

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 low complexity and well-documented schema cover how to invoke the tool, but with no annotations and no output schema the description does not state what the response contains or how to handle empty results. It also relies on sibling tool names rather than explicit differentiation, making it minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 coverage is 100%: the single 'time' parameter has an enum, a default, and a description. The description adds only the loose mapping from 'recently' to the time window, so it does not materially improve on what the schema already provides.

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 verb ('Fetch') and a narrow resource ('recently deleted .cl domains'), which is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like get_latest_domains or search_domains. The .cl TLD restriction and the 'deleted' state give an agent concrete selection criteria.

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 intended use case is implied clearly: use this tool when the agent needs recently deleted .cl domains. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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