get--v4-domains

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. 'Get domains' implies a read operation but reveals nothing about permissions, rate limits, pagination, side effects, or response format. For a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, this lack of behavioral context is inadequate.

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 extremely concise with just two words, front-loading the core action and resource. There is no wasted verbiage, though this brevity comes at the cost of clarity and completeness.

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 (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, many siblings), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's purpose, usage, behavior, or parameters, making it inadequate for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 0% description coverage for its 7 parameters, and the description adds no semantic information about them. Parameters like 'state', 'authority', and 'include_subaccounts' are entirely unexplained, leaving their purpose and usage ambiguous.

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 'Get domains' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding meaningful context. It specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'domains', but doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'get--v3-domain-stats-total' or 'get--v4-domains-name', nor does it clarify what kind of domains (email, web, etc.) or what 'getting' entails (listing, retrieving details, etc.).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools related to domains (e.g., 'get--v3-domain-stats-total', 'get--v4-domains-name'), the description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based on parameter names alone.

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