get_domain_info

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says it returns detailed information but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. No mention of potential side effects or dependencies (e.g., domain ownership). Minimal behavioral context.

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, clear sentence that includes both the overall purpose and specific examples of data returned. It is concise but could be improved by front-loading the most critical information.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the main purpose and lists key return fields. It is adequately complete for a straightforward query, though it omits prerequisites like domain ownership status.

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% and the schema description already defines the 'domain' parameter as 'Domain name to query (e.g., 'example.com')'. The tool description adds nothing beyond that; it only lists return fields. Baseline 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 verb 'Get' and specifies the resource 'detailed information about a domain'. It lists specific fields (expiry date, nameservers, WHOIS contacts, etc.), making the purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_dns and get_nameservers, which are narrower.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling tools with similar names (e.g., get_dns, get_nameservers), but no indication of when to choose this comprehensive one over a specific getter.

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