wafle_domains_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description need not restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context by enumerating the response contents (statuses, SSL expiry, verification token, DNS instructions) and the three verification methods, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every clause adds value. No redundant phrasing or filler.

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 read-only list tool with a clear schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, return values, and when to use it. No output schema exists, but the description explicitly lists the return fields, making the tool behavior complete for an agent.

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 67% (slug and status are described; limit is not). The description implies the slug identifies the store ('store X') but adds no explicit detail about limit or status beyond what the schema provides. It does not fully compensate for the missing limit semantics, but the remaining parameters are self-explanatory.

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 opens with 'List the custom domains attached to a wafle store,' which precisely identifies the verb (list), resource (custom domains), and scope (per store). It further details the returned fields (status, SSL expiry, verification token, DNS-setup instructions), clearly distinguishing it from domain add/status/verify siblings.

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 first when the user asks "what domains does store X have?" or before giving DNS instructions to a new tenant,' giving clear use cases. It does not name alternatives or say when not to use, but the context is strong enough for an agent to know when to invoke it.

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