get_dns_config

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates a read operation but doesn't mention potential permissions, data freshness, or any side effects. The output schema exists but behavioral aspects beyond return structure are absent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without extraneous words. Every word adds value.

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?

Despite lacking usage guidelines and behavioral details, the description combined with the output schema provides a reasonable overview for a zero-parameter read tool. The mention of 'upstream servers' and 'domain settings' gives a clear idea of what the configuration covers.

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 has zero parameters, so baseline is 4 as per guidelines. The schema covers 100% of params (none). The description adds no param info, but none is 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves DNS configuration, specifying 'upstream servers' and 'domain settings'. This specific verb+resource combination effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_network_interfaces' which may also involve DNS but are not focused solely on it.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention if it requires admin privileges or if similar info can be obtained from other tools. The sibling list contains many 'get_*' tools, but no differentiation cues are given.

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