dns_intelligence__lookup_dns

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 mention of network access, rate limits, timeouts, error behavior for non-existent domains, or caching. Only the intent of the operation is conveyed.

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 zero filler. The verb and scope appear immediately, which is exactly what an agent needs for scanning.

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?

The parameters are fully documented in the schema, but there is no output schema and no annotation coverage, so the agent gets no signal about what the lookup returns (records, TTLs, error shapes) or how it relates to the sibling DNS tools. Adequate but with clear 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 description coverage is 100%, and the enum on 'type' already enumerates all supported record types, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'specific record types on a domain' merely restates the two parameters without adding format or interpretation guidance.

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?

States a specific verb (lookup) and resource (DNS records) plus the scope (specific record types on a domain). The word 'targeted' hints at a contrast with bulk enumeration, but no sibling such as enumerate_dns is named, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tools are mentioned. Siblings like enumerate_dns, enumerate_subdomains, check_email_security and check_takeover clearly overlap in the DNS space, yet the description gives the agent nothing to route between them.

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