remove_dns_static

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not mention side effects, permanence, or any special conditions, so it contributes nothing beyond the annotations.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it could be expanded with useful details without becoming verbose.

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 tool's destructive nature, a required entry_id, and an optional device, the description is under-specified. It lacks information about permanent deletion, how the device parameter affects operation, and any comparison with non-destructive alternatives.

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 does not explain the parameters at all. It fails to clarify what entry_id refers to or how to obtain it, nor does it discuss the optional device 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 uses a specific verb ('Removes') and a clear resource ('static DNS entry'), which distinguishes it from related tools like disable_dns_static or update_dns_static. It is concise and unambiguous, though it could explicitly mention permanent deletion to further clarify the action.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as disable_dns_static. No context is provided about prerequisites, use cases, or why one would choose removal over disabling.

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