get_domain_diagnostics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, informing the agent of safety and idempotency. The description adds that the tool runs diagnostics, implying it queries external DNS and returns results without side effects, which is consistent with annotations. 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 two sentences long, with the action placed first ('Run DNS validation diagnostics'), making it easy to scan. Every word adds value, and there is no extraneous text.

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 simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations), the description provides sufficient information: what it does, when to use it, and its read-only nature. No additional context is necessary.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only mentions 'a domain' without explaining what the 'name' parameter expects (e.g., fully qualified domain name, format, or constraints). The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter details, leaving ambiguity about the parameter's format.

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 runs DNS validation diagnostics on a domain, which is distinct from sibling tools like get_domain (returns domain info) and get_domain_records (returns records). The verb-resource-action pair is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear usage context by stating 'Use after configuring records externally,' which helps the agent know the appropriate time to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or name alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for its simple purpose.

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