DNS Dig from Akamai Edge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the action (runs dig), the location (Akamai edge server), and the outcome (returns DNS records), which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state safety, rate limits, or potential failure modes, leaving some gaps for a network tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and purpose. No unnecessary words. The description is efficient and clear.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations, yet the description is minimal. It explains the general purpose but lacks detail on output format, parameter selection guidance, or troubleshooting context. It is adequate but not rich enough for a diagnostic tool with moderate complexity.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it does not explain the relationship between edgeIp and edgeLocationId or any usage nuances.

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 a DNS dig command from an Akamai edge server and returns DNS records. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools like curl_from_edge or mtr_from_edge.

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 a clear use case: 'Useful for debugging DNS resolution and propagation issues.' This gives context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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