arvan_update_dns_record

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying 'full replace,' which clarifies that the tool overwrites the entire record. This goes beyond annotations, though it could disclose more about side effects or permissions.

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 long, front-loaded with the core action ('Update a DNS record'), and every sentence adds value. No redundant or superfluous information.

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?

Given three required parameters (one nested) and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and record structure. However, it lacks details on return values (e.g., what the tool returns after update) and does not provide a complete list of record fields. It is adequate but has gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by listing example fields for the 'record' object (type, name, value, ttl, cloud). This adds crucial meaning beyond the schema's generic object type. However, the list is incomplete (ends with '…'), leaving some ambiguity.

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 'Update a DNS record (full replace),' using a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('DNS record'). The parenthetical 'full replace' differentiates it from creation or partial updates, and among siblings, it's distinct from create, delete, get, and list tools.

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 minimal usage guidance. It notes that 'record should contain the same fields as creation,' which implies using creation-like fields, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., creation, toggle). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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