cdn_list_domains

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

The description reveals that the tool returns status, CNAME, and business type, which gives useful behavioral context about the output. However, since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits like pagination, permissions, or whether it is a read-only operation. It does not address these, so it only partially fulfills the requirement.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action and resource first, then lists the key expected output fields. Every word contributes meaning.

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 zero-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and key return fields. It is not exhaustive about potential pagination or output format details, but given the simplicity of the tool, the provided description is largely adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema imposes no burden. The description correctly implies that no inputs are needed. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 clear verb ('列出' / list) and a specific resource ('腾讯云 CDN 加速域名'), and it explicitly names the key output fields (status, CNAME, business type). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like dns_list_domains or cloud_list_instances without ambiguity.

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?

The description provides clear context by specifying that this tool targets CDN acceleration domains, which naturally sets it apart from DNS domain listing and cloud instance listing. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, but the resource naming makes the intended scenario evident.

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