clash.verge.configure_dns_override

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'DNS resolution verification included' and the strong confirmation flow, which adds value. However, it does not describe permissions required, reversibility, side effects, or error states.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes critical operational notes. No wasted words; every sentence is essential.

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 the lack of output schema and no annotations, the description should cover return values, error conditions, and postconditions. It mentions verification but not what is returned. The tool is a configuration mutation, and the description omits these important details.

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?

All three parameters are described in the schema with 100% coverage. The tool description repeats the confirmation pattern from the schema but does not add new semantic meaning to the parameters themselves. The baseline 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 specifies the action (configure DNS kernel section) and the target file (dns_config.yaml owned by verge_dns_base). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from similar siblings like clash.optimize.dns, missing an opportunity for differentiation.

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 explicit step-by-step guidance: call first without confirmed to get nonce, then call with confirmed=true and the nonce. This is strong usage guidance. It does not mention when to avoid using this tool or suggest alternatives.

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