Get domain

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavioral context by naming the returned fields (expiry, renewal, nameservers, active services), though it does not mention error behavior such as an invalid or missing domain ID.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The resource and identifier appear immediately, followed by the useful detail fields.

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?

With one parameter, an output schema present, and annotations covering read-only/idempotent behavior, the description is nearly complete. The only minor gap is error or authorization behavior for invalid or inaccessible domain IDs.

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 single parameter has 100% schema description coverage and is already documented as "the Domeneshop domain ID, from list_domains." The description restates that it takes a Domeneshop domain ID but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Uses a specific verb+resource combination ("Get details for a single domain") and names the identifying key. The phrase "single domain" clearly contrasts with the sibling list_domains, so an agent can distinguish the scope without reading the schema.

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?

Makes clear this is for retrieving one domain's details and references the domain ID. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the single-item scope makes the intended context clear.

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