Get nameservers

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds only the scoping detail 'configured for your tailnet' and says nothing about return shape or whether the list can be empty, which is a modest addition over the structured data.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word (DNS, nameservers, tailnet) carries meaning and nothing is redundant.

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?

For a zero-argument getter with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient but does not describe what the response contains (e.g., a list of nameserver IPs) or how it relates to DNS preference/split-DNS config. It is adequate but leaves a clear gap for an agent working among many DNS-related siblings.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter surface for the description to explain. Baseline 4 applies; no parameter information is missing or needed.

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 specific verb (Get) and resource (DNS nameservers) scoped to the tailnet, so the operation itself is unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like tailscale_get_dns_preferences, tailscale_get_split_dns, or tailscale_get_dns_configuration, which an agent could easily conflate with this tool.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the multiple DNS-related getters in the sibling list. The description gives no prerequisites, no conditions, and no alternatives, leaving routing entirely to inference from the name.

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