opn_dns_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. It describes a lookup operation but does not specify safety, permissions, or whether it modifies state. It is minimal beyond the basic action.

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?

Three sentences: first states purpose, second gives use cases, third describes return format. No redundant words, information is front-loaded.

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 simplicity (2 params, 1 required), the description covers purpose, use cases, and return format. It lacks error behavior or parameter details but is adequate for a diagnostic tool with an output schema (mentioned).

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%, so the description should add meaning. It implies that 'server' is for specifying a DNS server, but does not explicitly link to the parameter. 'hostname' is obvious. Adds some value but not enough to fully compensate.

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 'Perform a DNS lookup from the OPNsense firewall' with a specific verb and resource. It also lists use cases that distinguish it from sibling tools like opn_dns_stats or opn_ping, though not explicitly naming them.

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?

Provides explicit scenarios for use: testing DNS resolution, verifying Unbound, checking a specific DNS server. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the positive guidance is sufficient.

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