network_dns_propagation

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

The description discloses that the tool sends outbound DNS queries to 14 third-party servers, is NOT read-only, contacts the open internet, and is rate-limited to 3 requests per minute. This adds significant context beyond the annotations (which only indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true). No contradictions.

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?

The description is four sentences long, efficiently front-loading purpose and usage guidelines before adding behavioral details. It is concise and well-structured, though a minor trimming could make it slightly tighter.

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 the tool's complexity (checking across 14 resolvers, rate limits, output summary), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage context, behavioral traits, rate limiting, and the list of resolvers. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. The description is complete.

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%, and the schema already provides detailed descriptions for all parameters (domain, record_type with enum, worker_id). The description only mentions domain and record_type implicitly but does not add new meaning beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool checks DNS propagation across 14 global resolvers. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'network_dns' by specifying that this tool checks propagation across multiple resolvers while network_dns is for a single authoritative lookup.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (after changing a record to confirm propagation) and when to use the alternative 'network_dns' (for a single authoritative lookup against one resolver). This provides clear guidance for tool selection.

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