dns_whois_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it reveals only the $0.001 USDC cost via x402, but not whether this is a read-only lookup, what data it returns, or any rate/authorization constraints. The 'Security & Network tool' tag adds no operational behavior.

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 short and front-loaded, but it is more of a title fragment than a useful description. It is not bloated, yet it undersells the tool by omitting functional substance.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an empty generic input schema, the description needed to carry the tool's full context. It only provides a category and cost, leaving the agent without enough information to select or invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema presents only a generic 'params' JSON object with no domain-specific keys, and the description adds no parameter meaning. Despite 100% schema coverage, the coverage is a placeholder, so an agent cannot infer what fields (e.g., domain/IP) to supply.

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 'dns whois lookup' restates the tool name and only adds a generic category ('Security & Network tool'). It does not specify the action or resource clearly and does not distinguish from sibling tools like dns_lookup or whois.

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; there is no mention of dns_lookup, whois, or reverse_dns_lookup. Only cost is stated, not usage context.

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