get mail domain

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the underlying command v-list-mail-domain, which helps an agent understand this is a wrapper around a verified listing command. It does not describe errors or behavior on missing domains, but the annotation coverage keeps this adequate.

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 the main purpose front-loaded. There is no filler or redundant wording, and the command detail is compact and relevant.

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 singular getter, the description plus schema and annotations are mostly sufficient: user and domain are required by the schema, format has an enum with a default, and annotations cover the safety profile. The main gap is that the description does not explicitly tie the parameters to the operation, but the field names and output schema largely cover this.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the roles of user, domain, or format. The parameter names and the format enum are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no parameter-level meaning and therefore fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 states a concrete action ('Get') applied to a specific resource ('one mail domain'), and the singular wording distinguishes it from sibling list_mail_domains. The implementation detail v-list-mail-domain reinforces that this is a read/retrieve operation.

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 singular 'one' implies this is for retrieving a specific domain rather than listing all, but the description does not explicitly point to list_mail_domains or state when not to use it. No prerequisites or alternative selection criteria are given, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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