get_intel_whois

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it only states the return type. It does not mention authorization requirements, read-only guarantees, rate limits, or what happens when data is unavailable; the read-only nature is only implied by the verb 'Get'.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and every word 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?

For a simple two-parameter read operation with fully described parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, the absence of usage guidance, output-schema, and any note on optional domain/required account_id leaves some context gaps for an agent choosing among many sibling tools.

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 schema already describes both parameters completely (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the domain focus.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a precise resource ('WHOIS information for a domain'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling intel tools like get_intel_domain, get_intel_ip, and get_intel_asn, which target different data.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus the surrounding get_intel_* siblings or get_registrar_domain. The phrasing only states what it returns, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the name.

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