query_top_domains

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it fails to mention that the tool is read-only, requires no special permissions, or any rate limits. The agent cannot infer safety or side effects from the minimal description.

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 a single concise sentence, which is efficient for a straightforward query tool. However, it could be slightly more structured, e.g., mentioning the use of time ranges, but it adequately conveys the essence without waste.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., ordered list of domains with metrics). It does not, leaving the agent without understanding the response format. The complexity is low, but the omission is significant for usability.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra guidance on parameter interactions (e.g., whether scope overrides start/end times) or value formats beyond what the schema already 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 that the tool queries top domains by traffic, distinguishing it from sibling tools like query_top_url (top URLs) and query_cdn_traffic (total traffic). The verb 'query' and resource 'top domains' are specific, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like query_top_referer or query_top_ua. An agent would have to infer from the name alone, and there is no mention of prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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