dns_lookup

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only adds 'Supports all record types including DNSSEC', which is a capability, not deep behavioral disclosure. It does not explain network behavior, resolver defaults (though the schema does), rate limits, or the format of returned data, leaving gaps for a first-time agent.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences—and gets straight to the point. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 is simple and the schema is rich, but without an output schema, the description should clarify what the query returns. It also does not mention when to use this instead of bulk or reverse variants. The description is adequate but not fully complete for the context.

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 covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, thus failing to enhance the semantic understanding of the parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('DNS records for a domain'), clearly stating the tool's main function. It further distinguishes itself from sibling tools like dns_reverse and dns_bulk by emphasizing forward lookups and support for all record types including DNSSEC.

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 does not mention sibling tools, exclusions, or conditions for use. The only implied usage is for querying DNS records, but no explicit 'when' or 'when not' is stated.

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