Get domain details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the scope of the returned information ('configuration and status') and does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as response format or error conditions, but for a simple read this is acceptable.

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 short, front-loaded sentences state the operation and intended use with little waste. The second sentence partly rephrases the first, but it adds the useful 'configuration and status' specificity.

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 one-parameter, read-only, get-details endpoint, the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it. The lack of an output schema is partly mitigated by the 'comprehensive domain configuration and status' phrasing, though more specific return information would be ideal.

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% and the only parameter, 'domain,' is documented as 'Domain name.' The description merely refers to 'specified domain' without adding format, ownership, or example details, so it does not improve on the schema.

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 a specific verb-resource pair, 'Retrieve detailed information for specified domain,' and further characterizes the result as 'comprehensive domain configuration and status.' This distinguishes it from list-style siblings like domains_getDomainListV1 and from specialized domain endpoints like domains_getDomainRenewalInformationV1.

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?

'Use this endpoint to view comprehensive domain configuration and status' gives a clear directive for when the tool is appropriate, though it does not explicitly state when to prefer sibling tools or any exclusions. The context is reasonably clear for a read-only detail endpoint.

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