list web domains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the detail that it 'Executes verified command v-list-web-domains,' which hints at a specific backend command but does not explain behavior like output format, pagination, or ordering. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the backend command detail is a useful addition. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are documented elsewhere. The description covers the main purpose and the required user scope. However, it does not mention the 'format' parameter or any filtering/ordering behavior, and it does not differentiate from sibling list tools. For a simple list tool with annotations and output schema, this is adequate but not complete.

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. The description mentions 'a user's web domains,' which maps to the required 'user' parameter, but it does not explain the 'format' parameter or its enum values. The schema itself documents the parameters, but the description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema.

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 specific verb and resource: 'List a user's web domains.' It clearly identifies the operation and the target resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_web_domain or list_dns_domains, but the resource type is clear enough that an agent can infer the distinction.

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 implies usage context: it lists web domains for a user, and the required 'user' parameter indicates the scope. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_web_domain (for a single domain) or list_dns_domains (for DNS domains). The context is clear but exclusions are not stated.

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