query_all_domain_config

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

No annotations provided; description only says 'one-click query' without detailing behavioral traits like read-only nature, potential performance impact, or error handling. The tool likely aggregates many configs but lacks transparency.

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?

Single sentence with clear purpose and examples in parentheses. No wasted words, front-loaded with the main action.

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 no output schema, the description lists the categories of configuration returned, giving a good sense of the output. However, lacks details on response format or error scenarios.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'domain'. The description adds context that the tool queries all config, but does not add new meaning to the parameter itself beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool queries 'all configuration information' of a domain, listing categories like origin, HTTPS, compression, cache, protocol, access control. It distinguishes from sibling tools which query specific aspects (e.g., query_domain_origin).

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 for a comprehensive overview, contrasting with specific query tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternative tool names.

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