hostodo_update_dns_record

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the tool's stub behavior: it returns a coming_soon response and does not perform the action. It also warns against sending secrets, adding important behavioral context beyond the schema.

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: the first states purpose and stub status, the second warns about secrets. No wasted words, front-loaded with critical info.

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 stub tool, the description is fully complete: it explains what it does (record demand), what it does not do (perform action), and what to avoid (secrets). No further context needed given its placeholder nature.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by warning 'Do not send secrets', which guides parameter usage beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 it updates a DNS record but immediately clarifies it's a stub that does not perform the action. The purpose is specific: a placeholder to record demand. It distinguishes from actual DNS tools like create/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?

The description warns 'Do not send secrets' and implies not to use for real operations, but does not explicitly list alternative tools (e.g., use create_dns_record/delete_dns_record). It provides no when-not-to-use context beyond being a stub.

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