pbs_node_dns_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It labels the tool as 'READ-ONLY', indicating no side effects, and lists returned fields. It could mention potential errors or rate limits, but for a simple get operation, this is sufficient.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of two sentences with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the key purpose and safety indication ('READ-ONLY').

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 presence of an output schema (context signal true), the return values are already specified. The description covers the core purpose, usage guidance, and behavioral notes. It could mention what happens if the node does not exist, but overall it is complete for a simple read tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already describes both parameters. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, though it implies the 'node' parameter via the context. Baseline 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 states the verb 'read' and the resource 'PBS node's DNS resolver configuration'. It lists the returned fields and distinguishes from the sibling tool pbs_node_dns_set, which is for changing the configuration.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (to read) and when to use the alternative (pbs_node_dns_set to change). It also notes the prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config', providing clear context.

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