I’d like to see how it turned out with those settings changed.
Now, photographically speaking, I think that it generally worked okay that the edges were fairly dark – it was realistic, except that there was no specularity and the edges looked like they had been wrapped in gaffer-tape.
Anyhow, in the long run, the unimportant edges of things like glass objects are often needing of special lighting treatment in a photographic studio. There might be a rim-light whose sole purpose would be to illuminate those edges in an interesting way, to help define clearly where the edges are, how soft or hard the material is, and that the edge is well-beveled. Other lighting may be chosen to carefully make-clear the effect that light is shining (refracting…) through the glass to the solid white domino. All of this lighting being done so subtly that it does not call attention to its own existence.
A certain amount of “what feels ‘missing’” in this shot, vis-a-vis (say…) a commercial photograph of the same subject, might be this. Some really good books on studio still-life photography can be a very valuable reference, as can some time spent in a good ol’ fashioned (digital, now…) “film” studio. Actually doing it. Lighting it. Watching it done. (“Oh wow, I didn’t even notice that light until you turned it off…” etc…)