tools_load_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the action of registering a domain's tool surface, but does not describe side effects (e.g., idempotency), authentication requirements, or error behavior. This is adequate but could be more transparent.

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: the first states the purpose, the second provides usage guidance and valid inputs. No wasted words, and the most critical information (when to use, valid domains) is 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?

Given the low complexity (loading a domain) and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and valid inputs. However, it lacks explanation of the optional 'database' parameter, preventing full completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions valid domains, hinting at the 'domain' parameter, but does not explicitly describe the parameters or their purpose. The optional 'database' parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving a significant gap.

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 'Register' and the resource 'a tool domain's full surface'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying usage beyond essential tools and listing valid domains, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'Use when you need tools beyond the essentials' and lists valid domains, providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or what happens if the domain is already loaded.

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