Manage DNS Settings

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'returns no_change if nothing differs', confirming idempotent behavior and clarifying the response. No contradictions, and it provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences: first lists the main updated fields, second describes idempotent behavior. No fluff, front-loaded with key info.

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 7 parameters, all schema-covered but no output schema, the description lacks details on the full return value (e.g., what it returns on success), error conditions, or prerequisites like authentication. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description lists several key parameters in a summary, but does not add new semantics beyond what's in 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?

Clearly states 'Update DNS resolver settings', listing specific parameters like upstream servers, cache size, cache TTL, and allow-remote-requests. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_dns_settings (read) or manage_dns_entry (individual entries).

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it doesn't compare to manage_dns_entry or explain that this tool is for global resolver settings, not per-entry DNS records. The idempotency mention is helpful but doesn't address usage context.

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