get_dns_record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no behavior for a nonexistent record ID, no auth/scope requirements, no rate-limit or error context.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness contributes to the specification gaps noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, for a 2-parameter lookup with 0% schema description coverage and rich sibling competition, the description omits the domain-argument semantics and any failure behavior, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and largely fails: 'within a domain' only loosely gestures at the domain parameter and never explains that it accepts a name or numeric ID, nor that record_id is a positive integer scoped to that domain.

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 clear verb (Read) and a specific resource (DNS record identified by its exact ID within a domain), which distinguishes it from list_dns_records and get_domain. The phrasing is slightly ambiguous about whether the returned payload is the record or just its ID, but the intent to fetch a single record by ID is legible.

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 guidance and no named alternatives; the agent is left to infer that this requires an already-known record ID and that list_dns_records is the discovery path. 'Exact ... ID' weakly implies a prerequisite but no exclusion or routing to siblings is stated.

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