domains_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Read-only' discloses the safety profile and 'paginated' implies a paging behavior, which is helpful. However, it doesn't describe return structure, ordering, or error behavior, leaving some uncertainty for an agent.

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 zero filler; front-loads the core action and safety trait. 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 read-only list with fully documented optional parameters, the description gives an agent enough to call it correctly. It lacks explicit return-format or default-value details, but that is a minor gap given the tool's low complexity and no output schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'paginated' aligns with pageSize/pageToken but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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?

Description states a clear verb+resource ('List domain resources') and adds scope and pagination information. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like domains_check_availability or domains_suggest, so it's clear but not fully distinguishing.

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 choose this over sibling tools; it doesn't mention alternatives or exclusions. The only contextual hint is 'Read-only', but it doesn't say when a read-only list is preferred.

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