tm_list_domains

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

The description reveals that each entry includes 'id, domain, verified flag, and the DNS / HTTP challenge tokens that are still in play.' This goes beyond the output schema by explaining the meaning of tokens. With no annotations provided, the description fully compensates by disclosing return structure and purpose.

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 paragraphs with no redundant words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds helpful context. Every sentence contributes 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 the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it describes the returned fields and their significance. No gaps remain for an agent to understand the tool's function.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema description coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter info. The baseline score of 4 applies.

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 explicitly states 'List all domains registered by the authenticated user with their verification status.' It clearly identifies the resource (domains), action (list), and scope (by user), distinguishing it from sibling tools like tm_add_domain or tm_verify_domain_dns.

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 provides usage context: 'Useful for answering "what domains am I allowed to load-test?" and for walking a user through verification.' While it does not list explicit exclusions or alternatives, the purpose is clear enough for the agent to infer when to use this tool over others.

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