get_dns_reverse_record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, so the safety profile is covered. The description is consistent with that and adds no contradictory behavioral claims, but it also does not add context about error behavior, pagination, or response contents beyond the annotation.

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?

A single, direct sentence that immediately conveys the operation and scope. There is no filler or redundant content.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with one well-documented parameter and a readOnly annotation, the description is mostly complete. It could mention what kind of details are returned or not-found behavior, but the lack of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation keep the gap small.

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%: the only parameter, reverse_record_id, is already described as 'the ID of the reverse DNS record'. The description adds no additional semantic detail, so the 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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('specific reverse DNS record'), and explicitly scopes it to a single record rather than a list. This differentiates it from sibling list_dns_reverse_records and similar DNS getters.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving one specific record by ID, especially given sibling list_dns_reverse_records exists. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over alternatives or mention that listing should be done with the sibling tool.

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