列出域名列表

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the output fields (domain, expiration time, status, review info) and mentions pagination and filtering, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it cover side effects, rate limits, or response structure beyond what is listed.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action and key features. Every word is meaningful, with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 the lack of output schema, the description compensates by listing displayed fields (domain, expiration time, status, review info). It covers pagination and search, which are the main features. However, it omits details like total count, sorting, or response format, though these are somewhat implicit for a list operation.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates the purpose of pagination and keyword search, adding high-level context but not providing additional details beyond the schema's individual parameter descriptions (e.g., default values, max page size). No parameter semantics are clarified further.

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 the tool lists all domains under the Alibaba Cloud account, with explicit support for pagination and keyword search. It specifies the displayed fields (domain, expiration time, status, review info), making the purpose unambiguous and differentiating it from siblings that likely target individual domain details or other actions.

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 usage for domain listing scenarios but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings like check_domain or query_domain_detail. There are no when-not instructions or alternative recommendations, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and title alone.

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