Get DNS Analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds context about what the tool returns: aggregate metrics like query count, response times, and cache performance over a time period. This is consistent with the annotations and provides additional behavioral insight without contradicting them.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently covers the purpose, scope, and primary return content, earning its place in concise structuring.

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?

With 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat minimal. It gives a high-level summary but fails to mention that specifying dimensions (e.g., queryName, coloName) will produce multiple grouped rows, nor does it describe the response structure. This gap is notable for a complex analytics tool.

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%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description only loosely references the time period (since/until) but does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. Hence, the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 gets a DNS query analytics summary for a zone, using the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'DNS query analytics summary.' It also mentions aggregate metrics like query count, response times, and cache performance, which effectively distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_dns_analytics_by_time that focuses on time-series breakdowns.

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 implicitly conveys that this tool is for aggregate summaries over a time period, not for time-series drill-downs. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for time-series needs or include clear 'when-not-to-use' guidance, so it falls short of a full 5.

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