Set nameservers

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

Annotations already signal mutation, idempotency, and destructiveness. The description adds value by warning that improper nameserver configuration can break domain name resolution on the VM, which is a meaningful behavioral risk beyond the structured hints. This is consistent with the destructiveHint flag rather than contradicting it.

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 short and front-loads the core action. The warning sentence earns its place because it conveys important risk. Minor awkward phrasing ('Be aware, that') does not hurt clarity.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and a key risk but omits what response to expect, whether the operation replaces or merges existing nameservers, and how missing optional parameters behave. It is adequate but leaves meaningful gaps for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 100%, so the schema carries most parameter documentation. The description adds no detail about how ns1, ns2, and ns3 are used, their format, or the fact that only ns1 is required. It does not improve on the schema's weak per-parameter descriptions like 'ns1 parameter'.

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 identifies the operation: setting nameservers for a specified virtual machine. It names the resource (virtual machine/VPS) and the action, which is enough to distinguish it from domain nameserver tools like domains_updateDomainNameserversV1, though it does not explicitly reference a sibling.

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 states the endpoint configures custom DNS resolvers for VPS instances, giving a clear purpose. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use it instead of related DNS or domain nameserver tools, and it does not mention any prerequisites or conditions that would make this tool the correct choice.

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