pve_get_node_dns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get' implies a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires specific permissions, returns structured data or raw output, handles errors, or has rate limits. For a tool with no annotations, this minimal description is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse. However, it's overly terse, bordering on under-specification, which slightly reduces its effectiveness.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., DNS settings as JSON), error conditions, or dependencies. For a tool that likely returns configuration data, this lack of context leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'node' documented as 'Node name'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or valid node names. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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 'Get node DNS configuration' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('node DNS configuration'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't specify what 'DNS configuration' entails (e.g., nameservers, search domains) or distinguish this tool from similar 'get' tools like pve_get_node_network or pve_get_node_status, which reduces its specificity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing node access), exclusions (e.g., not for setting DNS), or related tools like pve_set_node_dns for modification. This leaves the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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