whois_lookup

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

No annotations provided; the description mentions querying authoritative WHOIS servers and supporting 1,260+ TLDs, but lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or data completeness. Some behavioral context is present but insufficient.

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 concise sentences: first states the action, second details the output and scope. No superfluous information, well front-loaded.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality and supported TLDs. It could mention response format or potential delays, but overall is adequate for the complexity.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline for schema-rich tools.

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 tool performs WHOIS lookups for domain registration details, specifying the protocol and supported TLD count. It distinguishes from sibling tools (list_supported_tlds, refresh_whois_servers) implicitly.

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 explains what the tool does but does not explicitly specify when to use it over alternatives or mention exclusions. Given the sibling names, usage context is implied but not explicit.

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