check_domains

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions support for 500+ TLDs via RDAP and additional via WHOIS, adding useful context. However, it does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, or output format details.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Purpose, input, and technical detail are front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description vaguely mentions 'returns the availability status' but lacks specifics (e.g., response format, error handling, batch size limits). For a bulk tool, more details on constraints would improve 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by stating the parameter 'domains' is a 'list of domains', but does not specify format requirements (e.g., full domain syntax, case sensitivity). The addition is minimal.

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 'check' and resource 'domain names' with the qualifier 'multiple' and 'in bulk'. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'check_domain', which presumably handles single domains.

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 when checking multiple domains via 'in bulk' and 'list of domains', but does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for a single domain, use check_domain). Lacks direct alternative reference.

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