get_referring_domains

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return data (domain authority, backlink counts, dofollow ratio, dates) which is helpful. However, it does not disclose behavioral aspects such as whether it's a read-only operation, any rate limits, pagination behavior, or authentication requirements. More context would be expected.

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 concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose and key return fields. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 only 3 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential return values. It doesn't mention any caveats or limitations, but the tool is straightforward. The description is adequate for this complexity level.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like 'domain', 'limit', and 'order_by'. It only reinforces that the tool analyzes 'a target' domain.

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 exactly what the tool does: 'Get detailed list of domains linking to a target.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_anchor_texts (anchor texts) and get_backlinks_summary (summary).

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 context is clear: this is for analyzing domains that link to a target. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives like get_backlinks_summary or get_new_lost_backlinks, nor does it provide exclusions. Lacks explicit alternative guidance.

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