domains_get_glue_records

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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the operation itself. The annotation readOnlyHint=true already discloses the read-only nature, and the description does not provide any additional context such as error behavior, formatting, or ownership requirements. It simply restates the tool's purpose.

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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded and free of any redundant information. It earns its place with zero waste.

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 simplicity, a one-line description is largely sufficient. The output schema and annotations fill in return values and safety. However, it lacks a note about when this tool might be preferred over related tools, though this is minor given the clear naming.

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 input schema fully documents the 'domain' parameter with type and example, covering 100% of parameters. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action ('Get') and resource ('glue records'), scoped to 'a domain'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like domains_create_glue_record or domains_delete_glue_record, which handle mutations.

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 when to use this tool: to fetch glue records for a domain. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the sibling tools for creating, updating, and deleting glue records make the intended use clear. No exclusions are needed.

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