get_referring_domains

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool lists domains sorted by authority and returns backlinks with anchor context and rank. However, it omits details on error handling, data freshness, pagination, or required authentication. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences: first states core function and sorting, second provides use cases. Front-loaded, no redundant information, every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return values (backlinks with anchor context and rank). Lacks details on pagination and error handling, but covers essentials. Sibling tools are distinct, so role is clear.

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%, so baseline 3. Description adds minimal value beyond schema: limit default and plan-dependent max are already in schema; domain example is also in schema. No additional parameter context.

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 'list domains that link TO the target domain' and resource 'referring domains', with sorting by authority. It also explains output (backlinks with anchor context and rank), distinguishing it from siblings like check_domain or get_domain_info.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: 'when the user wants to see WHO links to a site, do competitor research, or find link-building opportunities.' No when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is clear and siblings are non-overlapping.

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