set_dns_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'modify' but does not explain whether changes are immediately applied, if they require a reboot, whether existing connections are affected, or the nature of the output. This is a significant gap for a configuration-changing tool.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it lacks any additional structure or elaboration that would help the agent understand the tool, and it provides only the bare minimum of 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 that this is a configuration modification tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is inadequate. It does not mention effects, parameter roles, or how this relates to other DNS tools. The presence of an output schema partially explains return values, but the description still leaves too many 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%: none of the three parameters (primary_dns, enable_cache, secondary_dns) have descriptions. The tool description also fails to mention or explain any parameters, leaving their semantics entirely ambiguous. It does not compensate for the schema gap at all.

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 '修改 DNS 配置' clearly states the verb (modify) and resource (DNS configuration), making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_dns_config or get_multi_line_dns beyond the obvious read/write distinction, and there is no scoping detail (e.g., which DNS settings are affected).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no context about when modification is appropriate. It merely states what it does, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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