Get Multi Line Dns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, which covers the safety profile for a zero-parameter read. The description adds nothing beyond that — no indication of what the returned multi-line configuration contains or how lines are represented — so the marginal behavioral value is close to zero.

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 short sentence with no filler and the purpose front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity is as much under-specification as conciseness.

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 parameters and an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, so the surface area is small and mostly covered. What is missing is disambiguation from the several other DNS-configuration retrieval tools in the sibling list, which is exactly the gap an agent would hit in practice.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to document. The baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4, and nothing here creates ambiguity about inputs.

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 states a verb and resource ("获取多线路 DNS 配置"), so the basic purpose is legible. However, it is essentially a Chinese restatement of the tool title with no added detail, and it does nothing to differentiate this tool from close siblings like get_dns_config, get_dynamic_dns_config, or get_ddns_config.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. An agent facing get_dns_config, get_dynamic_dns_config and this tool gets no signal about which one to pick or under what conditions.

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