security-get-domain-by-name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Get' implying a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, error handling (e.g., if domain doesn't exist), rate limits, or what the return format looks like (since no output schema exists).

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 zero waste—it directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded for a simple retrieval tool.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage (0%), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral context (e.g., what happens on failure), return values, and usage guidelines. For a tool with one parameter but no structured support, more detail is needed.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning by specifying that the 'name' parameter is used to retrieve a domain by its name. However, it doesn't provide details on format, constraints, or examples. With 1 parameter and no schema descriptions, baseline 3 is appropriate as it clarifies the parameter's purpose minimally.

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 resource ('a Sitecore domain'), specifying it retrieves by name. It distinguishes from sibling 'security-get-domain' (which likely lists all domains) by focusing on retrieval by specific name, though it doesn't explicitly mention this distinction.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'security-get-domain' (which appears to be a general domain listing tool) or other domain-related tools. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate.

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