dossier_dns

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses behavior: 'Fires six Cloudflare DoH (1.1.1.1) queries concurrently, each with a 5 s timeout' and describes the return format as a CheckResult discriminated union with success and error cases.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance, then behavioral details. Every sentence adds value; 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?

For a complex parallel DNS lookup tool with 6 record types and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, concurrency behavior, timeout, and return format. The explanation of the CheckResult union compensates for the lack of output schema.

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?

Only one parameter (domain) with 100% schema coverage. The description adds context: 'Public FQDN, e.g. example.com. Must be resolvable on the public internet; IPs, ports, paths, and protocol prefixes are rejected.' This goes beyond the schema's basic description.

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 'Fetch a domain's full DNS profile' and lists specific record types (A, AAAA, NS, SOA, CAA, TXT). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like dns_lookup (single record type) and dossier_full (all 10 checks).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use as the first step of a domain audit or when you need a comprehensive DNS snapshot' and provides alternatives: 'prefer dns_lookup for a single record type, or dossier_full for all 10 dossier checks at once.'

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