get--v3-domain_name-bounces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List all bounces' implies a read-only operation but doesn't specify permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what 'all' entails (e.g., time range, filtering). It lacks critical context for safe and effective use.

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 concise with a single sentence, but it's under-specified rather than efficiently informative. While it avoids unnecessary words, it lacks essential details, making it more of a placeholder than a helpful summary. It's front-loaded but incomplete.

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 tool's complexity (4 required parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain the resource context, parameter roles, behavioral traits, or output format, leaving the agent unable to use the tool effectively. It fails to compensate for the lack of structured data.

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 has 4 required parameters (domain_name, limit, page, term) with 0% description coverage, meaning none are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter information, failing to explain what these parameters mean or how they affect the listing. This leaves all parameters semantically undefined.

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 'List all bounces' states the verb ('List') and resource ('bounces'), but it's vague about scope and lacks sibling differentiation. It doesn't specify what 'bounces' are (e.g., email bounce events) or distinguish it from similar tools like 'get--v3-domain_name-bounces-address' or 'get--v1-bounce-classification-stats', making it minimally informative.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no usage direction. This is particularly problematic given multiple sibling tools related to bounces and domain data.

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