maltego_expand_domain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'builds a .mtgx graph' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., file overwriting), authentication requirements, or what the graph contains beyond the listed data types. The 'per A record' hint is vague.

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 sentence, very concise. However, it could be slightly expanded to cover some of the missing parameter details without becoming verbose.

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 is too minimal given the tool has 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations. It fails to explain the return value or graph structure, leaving agents with insufficient context.

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 mentions 'domain' and 'output path' implicitly but does not explain the 'overwrite' parameter or provide format/constraint details. The 3 parameters are inadequately described.

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 clearly states it builds a .mtgx graph around a domain and specifies the types of data included (whois, DNS, ASN per A record). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like maltego_whois, maltego_dns, and maltego_asn, which focus on individual data types.

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 description implies this tool is for comprehensive domain investigation but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like maltego_whois or maltego_dns. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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