Set DNS search paths

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds the crucial specifics of what gets destroyed: ALL existing search paths are replaced rather than merged. It does not cover auth/permission requirements or rate limits, so it is additive but not exhaustive.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the destructive replacement caveat immediately following. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 one-parameter setter with no output schema and full schema description coverage, the description plus annotations give the agent everything needed: what it configures, the overwrite behavior, and the safety profile. No material gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents searchPaths as a list of DNS search domains with examples. The description adds meaning beyond that by making clear the supplied array is the complete, replacement set rather than an append, which changes how the caller should construct the parameter.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('Set the DNS search paths') scoped to 'your tailnet', so an agent immediately knows what the tool does and that it is the write counterpart to tailscale_get_search_paths. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so it is clear rather than maximally differentiating.

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?

Usage is implied: it is a configuration setter, and 'Replaces all existing search paths' hints that this is a full-overwrite operation. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over tailscale_get_search_paths or tailscale_set_dns_preferences, and no stated preconditions or warnings about the overwrite.

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