Retrieve the current Dynamic DNS (DDNS) configuration from a DrayTek Vigor router, showing active settings for verification or troubleshooting without making any changes.
DDNS configuration (read-only)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description explicitly states 'read-only', which is a behavioral trait, but with no annotations, it carries the full burden. It does not explain what the tool returns, whether it queries live data, or any potential errors. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
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, which is concise, but it borders on under-specification. It is not a tautology because it adds 'read-only', but it is terse enough that an agent may not fully grasp the tool's function. It is appropriately front-loaded but lacks substance.
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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description should explain what information is returned or displayed. It does not, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context. Given the large set of sibling tools, this is incomplete for effective tool selection.
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?
The tool has zero parameters and the schema has no properties, so the description need not add parameter details. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for 0 params, and the description does not detract from that.
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 the resource (DDNS) and that it is read-only, but does not specify what aspect of configuration is shown (e.g., current settings, status, or all parameters). It is not a tautology, but it lacks specificity and does not differentiate from related show tools like ddns_log or show_dns.
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. The description does not mention related DDNS tools (ddns_log, ddns_enable, ddns_forceupdate) or any conditions for selection. An agent has no basis for choosing this over similar show commands.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.