List domains

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile carries little weight. The description adds real value by disclosing the shape of each result row, but says nothing about pagination behavior or result-size limits even though the schema exposes limit/offset.

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 short sentences with no filler, and the return-field inventory is front-loaded so an agent learns what it gets before how to filter. The second sentence is slightly redundant with the schema's own domain description.

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?

For an all-optional, read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description covers purpose, output fields, and one filtering strategy. The only meaningful omission is pagination guidance for large domain lists, which the schema partially handles via offset.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter already has its own documented meaning, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only a light hint that the domain filter reveals ownership; the user, domain_type, limit and offset filters get no extra interpretation.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List domains and subdomains") and enumerates the fields returned (owning account, type, document root, PHP version), which clearly separates it from siblings like whm_list_accounts or whm_list_dns_zones. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling it replaces, so it is not a 5.

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?

One concrete usage scenario is given: "Use the domain filter to find which account owns a domain." There is no guidance on when to prefer this over whm_list_accounts or whm_list_dns_zones, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated, leaving usage largely implied.

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