check_propagation_global

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'check DNS propagation across 6 global resolvers', but does not describe if it is read-only, what the resolvers are, rate limits, or any side effects. This is minimal transparency.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and efficient, though slightly terse.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is somewhat adequate. However, it does not explain what the output looks like or any error conditions, leaving gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 100% (the only parameter 'domain' has a description 'Domain to check'). The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 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 'Check DNS propagation across 6 global resolvers' uses a specific verb 'Check' and resource 'DNS propagation' with a clear scope 'across 6 global resolvers'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like check_dns, which likely checks a single DNS record.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It implies usage from the name and description but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements.

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