test_dns_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name, but it does not contradict the annotations either. It is neutral but minimally informative.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but it is not overly verbose. However, it is under-specified for a tool with four parameters and several sibling DNS tools. The sentence is concise but fails to earn its place by providing no usage or parameter context.

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 has 4 parameters, an output schema, and siblings, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain what the DNS test does, how parameters affect the test, or when to use it. The output schema covers return values, but the description misses critical context for correct invocation.

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 provides no information about the parameters (name, type, device, server). With zero coverage and no description compensation, the agent cannot understand parameter semantics beyond the raw schema field names.

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 and resource: 'Tests a DNS query.' This clearly indicates the tool performs a DNS test. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling DNS tools like get_dns_cache or flush_dns_cache, though the verb 'test' implies a probe rather than a retrieval or mutation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states what it does without mentioning appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent is left without direction on when to choose test_dns_query over other DNS-related tools.

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