update_dns_forwarder_host_override

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe mutation. The description adds only the 'existing' constraint and ID-based targeting, but does not disclose whether omitted fields are left unchanged or set to null, nor whether changes require apply_dns_forwarder_changes.

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?

A single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. No wasted words.

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 schema and annotations cover safety and parameter documentation, but the description leaves critical update semantics unaddressed, such as partial vs full replacement behavior and the effect of apply_immediately. This is inadequate for a mutation tool despite the supporting resources.

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% with descriptions for all six parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond reinforcing the override_id requirement.

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 action ('Update'), the resource ('DNS Forwarder host override'), and the method ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from create, delete, and search siblings.

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 implies usage for modifying an existing override but does not explicitly contrast with create/delete/search alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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