cc_discover

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses performance characteristics (index sorted reversed, cheap zone lookup) and warns that host_contains without a zone triggers a full crawl scan. However, it omits details on limit/min_pages/allow_full_scan behavior and lacks a clear statement about return format.

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 brief, with a clear opening statement followed by concise parameter notes. Every sentence adds information about usage or performance; no filler.

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 a 7-parameter tool with no annotations, the description covers only the search criteria and one performance warning. It omits the meaning of crawl, limit, min_pages, and allow_full_scan, making it incomplete. An output schema exists but is not provided to the agent in this context, so those gaps remain.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains tld, registry_suffix, and host_contains with examples and constraints, covering 3 of 7 parameters. The remaining parameters (crawl, limit, min_pages, allow_full_scan) are left undocumented.

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 states 'Find domains by zone and/or substring in host name' — a clear verb+resource+criteria. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the focus on zone/substring discovery is distinct enough.

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?

No guidance on when to use cc_discover vs sibling tools. It provides parameter-level usage advice (compound zones for registry_suffix, host_contains requires a zone) but does not address tool selection or exclusions.

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