getapi_lookup_dns_records

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses almost nothing: no rate limits, no auth requirements, no indication of what happens with type=ALL versus a specific type, and no note on caching or error behavior. For a read-only lookup this is a notable gap, though the operation is inherently low-risk.

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 front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the HTTP route bracketed at the end. No wasted words, though the route annotation is thin padding for an agent that needs behavioral detail instead.

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 two-parameter lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least clarify the type enum's role (especially ALL) and what the response contains. As written, an agent must infer the entire contract from the schema alone.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, yet it only loosely names 'domain and record type' without explaining the enum values (A, AAAA, MX, ALL, etc.), the default when type is omitted, or the 253-character domain limit. It adds partial meaning but leaves the enum discovery entirely to 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 states a specific verb (lookup) and resource (DNS records) scoped to a domain and record type, so the agent knows exactly what the call returns. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling getapi_lookup_dns_nameservers, which is a closely related concept an agent could easily confuse.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus getapi_lookup_dns_nameservers or getapi_lookup_ip, no prerequisites, and no indication of when a lookup would fail (e.g., invalid domain). The GET route is the only contextual hint.

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