Get recently registered .cl domains from the past hour, day, week, or month. Track new Chilean domain registrations for monitoring or research.
Fetch recently registered .cl domains
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| time | No | Time period (hour, day, week, month) | hour |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that this is a read-only fetch operation and scopes it to .cl domains, but it does not describe pagination, limits, or output structure. No contradiction with annotations exists.
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 compact sentence with no wasted words. It leads with the verb and resource and communicates the core behavior immediately.
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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description plus schema are sufficient to know what the tool does and how to call it. The return shape is left unspecified, but the tool's simplicity limits the impact of that gap.
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 schema fully documents the single 'time' parameter with an enum and description, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already handles the parameter semantics.
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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and a specific resource ('recently registered .cl domains'), making its purpose immediately clear. It also naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_deleted_domains or search_domains.
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 'recently registered .cl domains' implies when to use this tool: when the agent needs new registrations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives, exclusion criteria, or when to prefer a sibling such as search_domains or get_deleted_domains.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.