Get Personal Nameserver

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by stating the return includes IP addresses, which is not in annotations. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral context, though it omits error states or edge cases.

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?

A single sentence that efficiently communicates purpose and key outputs. No extraneous words, front-loaded with the action verb and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 simple read tool with two parameters, the description is mostly sufficient. It mentions the return includes IP addresses, compensating for the lack of output schema. However, it does not explain the full return structure (e.g., whether other fields like status are included) or error behavior, leaving minor gaps.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning ('by hostname' maps to 'host', 'parent domain' maps to 'domain'), but generally the schema already carries the burden. Baseline score of 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?

The description uses a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('personal nameserver'), specifies the input key ('by hostname'), and mentions included data ('including its IP addresses'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_personal_nameservers (list all) and update/delete_personal_nameserver (modifications).

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 when needing details of a specific nameserver, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_personal_nameservers for a list), nor conditions to avoid. It lacks when-not-to-use or prerequisite context.

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