ss_dns_save

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 reveals that the tool performs mutations (add/update), has a 500-record limit, and implies conflict resolution via the 'force' parameter. However, it does not disclose permissions needed, error handling, or whether existing records are overwritten or merged. This is adequate but not rich.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the core function and a crucial constraint (500-record limit). It is front-loaded and contains no fluff.

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 mutation tool with 3 parameters (including nested objects) and no output schema, the description lacks return value information, such as success/failure indicators or whether the operation is idempotent. It does not address potential side effects or prerequisites, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand behavior.

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%, so the input schema already documents all parameters clearly. The description adds the limit of 500 records but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Add or update DNS records for a domain', specifying the verb (add/update), resource (DNS records), and scope (per domain). The explicit limit of 500 records per call distinguishes it from sibling tools like ss_dns_records (presumably read-only) but does not differentiate between other mutation tools like ss_dns_delete.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that deleting records should use ss_dns_delete or that viewing records should use ss_dns_records. The description lacks explicit context for proper selection.

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