list_dns_static

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the literal action. It does not mention default behavior (e.g., whether it lists entries across all devices or only the specified device) or how filters affect results.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently communicates the core operation.

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?

The presence of an output schema and annotations covers return values and safety, but the description leaves gaps around filtering semantics, device scoping, and the interplay of optional parameters. It is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks depth for sophisticated use.

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 0%, and the description contains no parameter information. With 6 optional parameters, the agent must rely entirely on parameter names and defaults, which is insufficient for understanding semantics like regexp_only or how filters combine.

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 'Lists static DNS entries' uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('static DNS entries'), clearly distinguishing this bulk-list operation from singular tools like get_dns_static. It is concise and unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_dns_static or list_dns_cache. There are no explicit use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer applicability solely from the name.

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