dns_add_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It adds value by noting 'Propagation can take several hours,' a key latency trait. However, it omits other important behaviors such as whether updates are allowed, permission requirements, idempotency behavior (despite a 'unique_id' parameter), and error scenarios like duplicate records.

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 two sentences and achieves its purpose without extraneous text. It is front-loaded with the core action. A slightly more structured break (e.g., bullet for propagation) could improve readability without adding length.

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 create tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It doesn't explain return values (e.g., confirmation, resource ID), error handling, or the effect of the 'comment' and 'unique_id' parameters on behavior. Propagation delay is noted, but pre-existing record conflict handling is missing. The lack of annotations raises the requirement but fails to fully meet it.

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% so the baseline is 3. The description does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema for any parameters. It does not explain format expectations, constraints, or how parameters interact (e.g., record and type).

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 'Add a DNS record to a domain' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action and target. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'dns_list_records' and 'dns_remove_record' by implying creation rather than reading or deletion.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'dns_list_records' or 'dns_remove_record'. The context for when to add (e.g., new record needed) is implied but not stated, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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