get_domain_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool checks across all countries and returns countries and ISPs, which is informative. However, it does not mention data freshness, rate limits, or whether the check is real-time. For a simple query tool, this is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value: the first defines the action and scope, the second specifies the output and gives an illustrative example. No redundant information.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description clarifies what the output contains (countries and ISPs). It covers the core functionality for a simple lookup tool. However, it does not explain possible error conditions, data format, or pagination if results are large. This is a minor gap.

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 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'domain', so the description adds limited value beyond reinforcing the parameter's purpose. The example question provides context but does not specify format constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 if a domain is blocked across ALL countries' and specifies the output: 'Returns which countries and ISPs block the domain.' The example question 'Where in the world is twitter.com blocked?' reinforces the global scope, distinguishing it from country-specific tools like 'get_country_status' or 'check_domain_blocked'.

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 that this tool is for a global overview by emphasizing 'across ALL countries,' but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'check_domain_blocked' (which might be country-specific). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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